open world program open world leadership …...world program. today, open world has more than 25,000...
Post on 25-Sep-2020
2 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
OPEN WORLD PROGRAM
OPEN WORLD LEADERSHIP CENTER
2017 GRANT GUIDELINES
Introduction
The congressionally sponsored Open World program brings emerging leaders from
participating countries to the United States in order to give them firsthand exposure to the
American system of participatory democracy and free enterprise. The program allows
American leaders and their counterparts from Armenia, Azerbaijan, Estonia, Georgia,
Kazakhstan, Kosovo, Kyrgyzstan, Mongolia, Russia, Serbia, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and
Ukraine to engage constructively with one another in a manner that complements the U.S.
Congress’s public diplomacy efforts on timely issues such as accountable governance and
the legislative process, young leadership development, entrepreneurship, health issues,
education, environment, and the rule of law. The principles of accountability, transparency,
and citizen involvement in government are among the concepts emphasized by the Open
World program. Today, Open World has more than 25,000 alumni and a network of 8,300
host families in more than 2,300 communities throughout the United States. The program
is administered by the Open World Leadership Center (the Center), an independent entity
established in the U.S. legislative branch in 2000. The program serves Members of
Congress—and their constituents and staff—and demonstrates to delegates the role of the
legislative branch in a mature and vibrant democracy, with the goal of helping these
delegates strengthen legislative bodies—and citizen involvement in the legislative
process—in their own countries.
Open World’s mission is:
To introduce rising leaders of emerging countries to the importance of legislative
functions in creating and sustaining democracies . . . through the introduction of
young foreign leaders to American democratic governing and free market operations
at every level; federal, state, and local.
In light of this mission, Open World will continue to bring emerging leaders from Eurasia
to the United States, while endeavoring to foster lasting ties that result in ongoing
cooperation and collaboration. This solicitation seeks proposals to host delegates from the
following countries: Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kosovo, Kyrgyzstan,
Russia, Serbia, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Ukraine. Open World will give greater
weight to those 2017 hosting proposals that (a) give delegates significant exposure to
federal, state, county, and local legislators, the structure and functions of legislatures, and
09/16/2016 2
the legislative process; (b) include planned meeting(s) with relevant Members of Congress;
(c) are likely to produce new partnerships or further existing ones; (d) include specific
follow-on project activities and/or significant projected results, such as plans for substantive
future reverse travel;1 (e) include collaborative programming with American young
professionals organizations; (f) provide delegations an appropriate opportunity to make a
formal presentation on their professional activities to their U.S. counterparts (this is a
program requirement); and (g) provide for significant cost-sharing of the program expenses.
Some hosting proposals will be judged specifically for their ability to program as described
in (a) above, especially in a state capital when the state legislature is in session (usually the
first three months of the year).
The Open World program was originally established in 1999 as a Library of Congress–
administered pilot project to give emerging Russian leaders firsthand exposure to the
American system of democracy through visits to local governments and communities in the
United States. Open World began expanding to other countries in 2003. To date, more
than 25,000 current and future leaders—from virtually all administrative regions of the
participating countries—have taken part in Open World. The average age of delegates is
37; roughly half are women.
Overall, the Open World program focuses on developing an international leadership
network through which professional counterparts with mutual interests are able to consult
and cooperate with each other on issues affecting their communities. Reflecting its identity
as a U.S. legislative branch entity, the Open World Leadership Center ensures that all
delegations receive significant exposure to the role and procedures of American legislative
bodies. As part of this focus, the Center will ask local host organizations to set up meetings
with Members of Congress, congressional staff, and state, county, and local legislators and
their staff members, so that delegates can review such functions as lawmaking, legislative
oversight, and constituent relations with officials engaged in these activities. Delegates
should also learn about the effect of legislation on their exchange’s assigned theme.
The Center intends to award grants for the hosting of 97 delegations under these guidelines
for 2017. Each delegation will consist of five delegates and one facilitator.2 In addition,
the Center is looking for illustrative proposals for up to ten delegations of Parliamentarians
from some of the countries listed in this solicitation. As of time of this solicitation,
parliamentary delegations and dates are yet to be determined, but it is likely that delegations
will come from the following countries: Georgia, Kyrgyzstan, Mongolia, Serbia, Tajikistan,
Turkmenistan, and Ukraine January through March. (Please see the table on pp. 33-36 for a
listing of currently planned 2017 Open World delegations by theme and travel date.) The
Center invites U.S.-based organizations with either established foreign visitor programs or
demonstrated ability to host foreign visitors to propose hosting from one to ninety-seven
1 Reverse travel is when someone affiliated with an Open World U.S.-based exchange travels to a
participating Open World country and meets with alumni during this visit. Open World cannot fund reverse
travel or follow-on activities. 2 Facilitators are young co-nationals of the delegates, with excellent English skills and, usually, previous
experience living in the United States. They will provide after-hours interpretation support, especially for
meals and cultural events, along with facilitating logistical and cross-cultural matters.
09/16/2016 3
(plus any parliamentary) delegations from the participating countries. Those organizations
that have projects and/or partnerships with their colleagues in participating countries are
strongly encouraged to offer to defray and/or cover some of the costs of such programming
by either covering some of the airfares and/or hosting costs themselves or having their
proposed delegation members prepared to cover all or some part of their travel or other
programmatic costs.
Applications for all country programming in this solicitation are due close
of business Monday, October 17, 2016. Please see pp. 44-45 for
instructions on submitting applications.
The Center will provide grants for hosting delegations to approved organizations that
support Open World’s objectives (see below).
2017 GRANT PROCEDURES
Grants Overview
The 2017 Open World Program will focus on emerging political, civic, and community
leaders from the national, regional, and local levels, and will put a strong emphasis on
(1) acquainting participants with American lawmakers and legislative functions and
processes at different levels of government; (2) helping develop new, or further existing,
networks and/or partnerships between delegates and their U.S. counterparts; and (3) hosting
delegates age 30 and under.
While some candidates are nominated by international organizations, most are nominated
by U.S. and participating-country agencies and institutions. The Center looks for talented
leaders who are relatively young (no older than age 40), and, as noted above, in 2017 the
Center will continue to focus on those age 30 or under, identifying specific delegations that
must only include delegates that are 30 or under, although that is a priority for all
delegations. Candidates are vetted using the following criteria: demonstrated leadership
skills and a commitment to building a civil society; extent of activities in one or more of the
thematic areas for Open World exchanges; participation in the political process, especially
as legislative officeholders, candidates, or staff; community involvement or volunteer work;
and established U.S. ties or the potential to forge such ties. Ideal nominees will have no
previous travel to the United States. English-language ability is not required.
Delegates and facilitators will be invited for up to 10-day exchanges3 in the United States.
Homestays with American host families are an integral element of the program.
The Center plans to host up to 582 participants4 (97 delegations) under these guidelines,
with up to 228 participants (38 delegations) coming from Ukraine, up to 144 participants
3 Delegations stay in Washington, DC, for two days to attend an orientation program hosted by the Center,
then spend eight days in the local host community. Exceptions may be made by the Center on an as-needed
basis, and in close consultation with the appropriate grantee(s).
09/16/2016 4
(24 delegations) from Russia, up to 12 participants (2 delegations) from Armenia, up to 18
participants from Azerbaijan (3 delegations), up to 24 participants (4 delegations) from
Georgia, up to 30 participants (5 delegations) from Kazakhstan, up to 30 participants (5
delegations) from Kosovo, up to 24 participants (4 delegations) from Kyrgyzstan, up to 24
participants (4 delegations) from Serbia, up to 30 participants (5 delegations) from
Tajikistan, and up to 18 participants (3 delegations) from Turkmenistan.
Final 2017 hosting numbers will depend on available funding.
Grant Guidelines Contents
This document contains, in order:
Grantee eligibility requirements and programming priorities
Open World objectives
Short Hosting Theme descriptions
Proposed 2017 travel dates
Grantee programming/administrative requirements
Local-hosting document deadlines
Results tracked by Open World
Key dates and deadlines
Criteria for evaluating grant applications
A grant proposal outline
Financial procedures, including methods of determining in-kind contributions
Appendixes
Procurement guidelines
Cost principles
A form and instructions for reporting cost share
A glossary of terms
Please note: the section on results describes outcomes tracked by the Open World
Leadership Center and explains grantees’ and local host organizations’ roles in helping
report them.
Eligibility for an Open World Grant and Programming Priorities
Any U.S.-based organization with either established foreign visitor programs or
demonstrated ability to host foreign visitors is eligible. U.S.-based organizations with
ongoing project activity or initiatives in any of the countries covered by this solicitation that
can be furthered by an Open World visit should describe this activity. An applicant
proposal:
4 The term “participants” includes delegates and facilitators. This is the number of participants covered by
this solicitation. Additional delegations are in the planning stage, and Open World grantees will be solicited
to host them when they are added.
09/16/2016 5
Must demonstrate that the applicant organization has the ability, experience, and
expertise to provide excellent programming in the Hosting Theme(s) for which it is
applying and/or will establish cooperative agreements with expert local host
organizations that can do so.5
Will be given preference if it demonstrates that the applicant organization has the
ability to provide programmatic activities with federal, state, county, and local
legislators and legislative staff that will enhance the delegates’ understanding of the
legislative process and the structure and functions of American legislative bodies.
Will be given preference if it is likely to produce new partnerships or further
existing ones.
Will be given preference if it includes ideas for specific follow-on project activities
and/or significant projected results, such as plans for substantive future reverse
travel.
Will be given preference for a grant award if it demonstrates how the applicant
organization will involve one or more organizations composed of young American
professionals6 in providing some of the delegates’ professional, networking, and
cross-cultural programming. To the extent possible, such young professional
organizations should be focused on activities relevant to a delegation’s Hosting
Theme.
Will be given preference for a grant award if its accompanying budget submission
includes a significant cost share/in-kind contribution for Open World delegations,
such as paying all or a significant portion of local hosting expenses, or all or
portions of airfares.
Will be given preference for a grant award if it demonstrates how results (as defined
on pp. 41-42 below) will be accomplished, particularly if this programming would
further ongoing or proposed projects/partnerships with the applicant organization or
one of its proposed local host organizations.
The Center will permit (on a very limited basis) organizations awarded 2017 Open World
grants under these guidelines to nominate candidates for competitive delegate selection for
exchanges that will support the organizations’ ongoing or proposed projects/partnerships.
Any applicant organization that wishes to nominate candidates must include in its proposal
a clear strategy for nominations that demonstrates the organization’s ability to identify
quality candidates who match Open World’s criteria, including Open World’s emphasis on
5 Local host organizations for past Open World exchanges have included local affiliates of grantee
organizations; colleges and university-based centers; and civic associations that have experience with
international visitors. Each local host organization designates a local host coordinator who will have overall
responsibility for the eight-day community visit. 6 Types of organizations include young-adult chapters of professional and business organizations; young-
alumni associations, and young-adult branches of charitable organizations.
09/16/2016 6
young professionals age 30 or under. If the applicant organization plans on having one or
more participating-country organizations propose candidates for a specific hosting program,
the rationale for using each organization, and each organization’s complete contact
information, must be included in the proposal. The nominations strategy must also
demonstrate that the candidates will meet Open World’s selection criteria, enhance a
community partnership and/or project, and/or foster long-term collaboration with U.S.
counterparts.7 It is also encouraged that delegates chosen to participate in such ongoing
project or partnership programming pay some or all of their program related travel and pre-
departure orientation expenses. In these cases, such cost-share information should be
included in the nominations strategy for that project.
Any candidates nominated by grantees must submit Open World’s standard delegate
application form and go through the same competitive, transparent vetting process as other
nominees for the program. Open World will closely coordinate the nomination process
with the relevant grantees and the logistical contractor.8 Please note that these programs
receive extra scrutiny from the vetting committees, and if there are not sufficient finalists
from the grantee’s nominees, other Open World finalists that fit the delegation will be used
to fill the delegation.
The Center also seeks proposals that, for one or more local programs, clearly specify the
type(s) of delegates desired (e.g., regional and local legislators, mayors, NGO leaders,
media professionals) and/or localities that delegates should come from, in order to have
Open World exchanges that support specific projects or foster existing partnerships. Please
make such requests very clear in any proposal.
Objectives
Open World delegates include some of the participating countries’ most dynamic, highly
educated emerging leaders, who are eager to share their experiences with Americans for a
robust and mutually beneficial exchange of ideas—an element critical to our programming.
The Open World program is designed to ensure that delegates have the opportunity to:
Develop an understanding of the people who interact with their American
professional counterparts. For example, a delegation of mayors and other city
officials might meet with the host community’s mayor, city manager, city council
members, mayor’s office staff, key departmental staff, and local political reporters.
Share their professional expertise through planned formal presentations, panel
discussions, and/or roundtables with their American counterparts and contacts, and
7 If an applicant organization anticipates that one or more of its prospective subgrantees will want to nominate
candidates, its proposal should include the information requested in this paragraph for each such prospective
subgrantee. 8 The Open World Leadership Center will serve as the logistical contractor for the delegations from Armenia,
Azerbaijan, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kosovo, Mongolia, Serbia, Tajikistan, and Turkmenistan, and possibly for a
limited number of delegations from one or more of the other countries covered by this solicitation.
09/16/2016 7
present information about their country’s culture, history, and current affairs to
members of their host community (this is a program requirement).
Develop an understanding of the role of the U.S. Congress and state, county, and
local legislatures in shaping, overseeing, and/or funding programs and institutions
connected with the applicable Open World Hosting Theme and Subtheme.
Develop an understanding of how citizens and interest groups work to affect the
legislative process (at the federal, state, county, and local levels) on issues related to
the delegates’ Hosting Theme.
Network with American professionals and hosts who are interested in maintaining
contact beyond the eight-day community visit for ongoing cooperation and
collaboration.
Exchange views with influential representatives of appropriate federal, state, county,
and local government agencies; legislators; civic organizations and other non-
governmental organizations (NGOs); and the business and education communities.
Participate in community events to gain an understanding of the role of community
organizations’ interactions with government.
Receive an overview of the relationships among:
a) the executive, legislative, and judicial branches of state, county, and local
government;
b) the business and civic communities and government; and
c) individual citizens and government.
Through the Open World program, the delegates should also be introduced to basic
concepts of American civil society so that they:
Acquire an understanding of the important elements of American civil society in
order to make constructive comparisons with civil society in their own country.
Acquire an understanding of governance in a mature democratic society and the rule
of law in American society, including the concepts of accountability and
transparency, the separation of powers, and the interrelationships of federal, state,
county, and local governments.
Acquire an understanding of the roles of American government, civic institutions,
free enterprise, and voluntary organizations as they relate to the relevant Open
World Hosting Theme.
Develop a better understanding of American culture and society and contribute to
enhanced American knowledge of the Open World country’s society, culture, and
institutions.
09/16/2016 8
Finally, an essential component of the Open World program is that the delegates have
ample opportunity to inform their hosts and their host communities about their countries,
their professional lives and responsibilities, and the key political and cultural dynamics of
the societies in which they live.
Hosting Themes
The 2017 Open World Program will offer a different set of themes for each participating
country. Country themes were developed in close consultation with the U.S. Embassy in
each participating country, NGOs, experts on the region, and participating-country
organizations. Delegates will be selected based on their activities and background in one or
more of the themes.
Because Open World resides in the legislative branch and serves the U.S. Congress, its
historical mission includes exposing delegates to the role of legislatures and legislators in a
successful democracy. The Center, therefore, asks grantees and their local host
organizations to set up meetings and other professional activities for their delegates with
Members of Congress or their staff, state legislators, and city council members and other
local lawmakers. The purpose of these activities is to give delegates firsthand insights into
how American legislators carry out such functions as lawmaking, legislative oversight, and
constituent relations, especially as these functions relate to a delegation’s Hosting Theme.
Meetings with staff of state legislative committees and legislative support agencies are also
encouraged, when feasible.
Center staff oversee the process of forming and placing Open World delegations. Center
staff and the Center’s logistical contractor will work to place delegates in host communities
that are comparable to their own communities and that can offer experiences and
information directly relevant to the delegates’ interests. Center staff and the Center’s
logistical contractor will also work closely with grantees on matching specific delegates or
specific types of delegates with approved grantee programs. Wherever possible, these
placements will be based on already-established ties or plans specified in grant applications
to forge new ones. Center staff and the Center’s logistical contractor will also work with
grantees to ensure that host-community visits include opportunities for delegates to give
voluntary presentations and to meet with lawmakers and legislative staff.
The host-community visit should give delegates firsthand experience with their professional
counterparts’ daily work routines and offer a view of American life through community and
cultural activities and homestays. All programming, regardless of Hosting Theme, should
include extensive exposure to legislative processes, and how these processes affect the
Hosting Theme. The delegates will prepare for their host-community activities by
attending a pre-departure program (usually held in their home country’s capital city)
followed by an arrival orientation program conducted in Washington, DC. The orientation
program will review the Open World program’s goals and provide an overview of the
delegations’ Hosting Theme(s); federal, state, and local governments and their
interrelationships; a general overview of the federal legislative process; the balance of
09/16/2016 9
powers; current issues in U.S. governance and politics; the rights of individual citizens; and
American culture. Delegates will be introduced to the Center’s initiatives to foster ongoing
professional and community networks, including Open World’s outreach efforts on social
network sites such a Facebook and Twitter
(http://www.facebook.com/openworldleadershipcenter2 and
https://twitter.com/OWprogram). The delegates will also learn about American home life
and practices to prepare them for their homestays.
The host community visit must include an appropriate opportunity or opportunities for the
delegates to present the professional and cultural aspects of their life to their colleagues and
the community at large. The professional and cultural programming should be interactive
in nature to ensure that the delegates have the opportunity to discuss their professional
responsibilities and aspirations, the status of their theme/subtheme in their country, as well
as their country’s cultural milieu. The learning experience must be a two-way street.
Please note that a number of delegations from among the countries listed below might
consist entirely of young professionals age 30 or under. As of the publication date of these
guidelines, a few of these travel dates are indicated, but it has not been determined yet how
many other delegations, when, or under which themes such delegations will travel. The
relevant grantee will be informed of these delegations in a timely manner.
Applicant organizations are asked to indicate in their proposals for which countries, themes
and subthemes, and dates they seek to host. (See instructions beginning on p. 44.)
Proposed travel dates can be found in the table on pp. 33-36.
Below, listed by country, are the Hosting Themes, each with an accompanying
rationale and a general description of the types of delegates who will participate.
Armenia Themes
Promoting Media Literacy
Rationale: With the increase of cases of media manipulation, there is a need for greater
focus on media literacy. The Media Initiatives Center in Armenia has developed a media
literacy curriculum and is working with the Ministry of Education for its broad adoption as
part of the public education curriculum. Exposure of a mixed group of education policy
makers, administrators, and teachers to the U.S. experience and tradition of media literacy
teaching at all levels, including university, would be extremely beneficial for expanding the
understanding of the topic and promoting the adoption of a media literacy program within
the public school system of Armenia. Delegates should also learn about public policies that
support media literacy education in the United States, and develop a network of media
literacy proponents and educators for further collaboration.
Accountability and Ethics in Government – E-Freedom of Information for Government,
Civil Society, and Media Representatives
09/16/2016 10
Rationale: The program will expose participants to the methods used to prevent corruption,
encourage ethical leadership and transparency, and ensure accountability to the public
through the broad dissemination of public information. The Government of Armenia
recently adopted acts impacting on Freedom of Information (FOI) practices in that country
which introduce a number of new methods that enable citizens, journalists and other
requestors to submit electronic FOI requests to state bodies; coordinate and regulate FOI
officers' work; mandate state bodies to ensure that FOI responses be complete and accurate;
and regulate fees. E-FOI is in the very early stage of development in Armenia, while the
U.S. is quite advanced and can serve as a model country in this respect. Participants will
explore the critical role that NGOs, advocacy groups, and the media play as “watchdogs” as
well as how social media is increasingly used to monitor good governance. Participants
will look at “whistleblower” issues, the impact of the Freedom of Information Act, and
various state sunshine laws. The program will contribute to the goal of transparency,
accountable governance, and citizen engagement, and provide ideas for improvement of the
public transparency in Armenia.
Azerbaijan Themes
Women in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math)
Rationale: The Government of Azerbaijan is making efforts to diversify its economy away
from an overreliance on the oil sector and bolster its private sector. In addition, women in
Azerbaijan face numerous social barriers to entering the science and technology
fields. This program will enable women who have an expressed interest in science and
technology fields to gain greater expertise and be exposed to the private sector’s innovative
ways of thinking and problem-solving through meetings with female entrepreneurs in
science/tech and via visits to universities in the United States. The participants could
engage in program activity that allows them to design/propose innovative solutions to
diversify Azerbaijan’s energy sector and increase private-sector entrepreneurship in the
country. The best candidates for this program would be advanced university-level female
students concentrating in STEM fields and female entrepreneurs or small-business owners
in science and tech-related fields.
Environmental Campaigns/Public-Private Partnerships
Rationale: While Azerbaijan has committed to meet U.N. climate change goals and
adopted a national target to increase the use of alternate energy by 20% by 2020, in general,
adoption of green practices in the business sector and environmental education and
consciousness among the public remains relatively low. This program seeks candidates
from government, civil society, and the private sector who are interested in developing
strategies for environmental campaigns such as promoting energy efficiency, fighting
against pollution and littering, promotion of recycling, and natural resource
conservation. The program would provide models for public-private collaboration in the
plan and design of environmental goals and targets; marketing and media strategies;
funding and budget management; and other elements that contribute to formulating
successful environmental campaigns.
09/16/2016 11
Combatting Domestic Violence
Rationale: Thousands of women in Azerbaijan are fighting an everyday battle for safety,
respect, and dignity. Azerbaijan prides itself on being the first Muslim-majority country in
the world to offer women’s suffrage, and there is even a “Free Woman” statue in the center
of Baku, which depicts a proud lady removing a head covering. However, domestic abuse
of women is still commonplace in Azerbaijan, especially in rural communities.
Compounding the problem (and perpetuating it) is the fact that most domestic violence
cases are not reported. This program would be a valuable opportunity for representatives
from Azerbaijan to learn about best practices to combat domestic violence, including
awareness campaigns. Candidates suitable for the program would be Members or staffers of
the National Assembly (Parliament), representatives of the Ministries of Education and
Justice, and the State Committee for Family, Women and Children Affairs, and
representatives from civic organizations, domestic abuse shelter leaders, and journalists.
Georgia Themes
Role of Local Legislatures/Staff
Rationale: As part of Open World’s efforts to ensure programming for legislatures and
legislators/staff in its participating countries, programming is planned in the first three
months of the year to coincide when most U.S. state legislators in session for a broad
programming in legislative processes. Local governance in Georgia is organized according
to its Constitution and European Charter of Local Self-Government (ratified by Georgia in
2004[) and the Organic Law of Georgia on Local Self-Government, the latest version of
which was adopted in 2014. Georgia’s municipal councils and various “self-governing”
cities and communities could benefit greatly by participating in and observing legislative
practices in the United States, with a focus on efficiency and transparency. This delegation
might also include national level legislators and/or staff.
Environmental Protection/Sustainable Development
Rationale: In 2014, Georgia signed the EU Association Agreement, committing to respect
the principles of sustainable development, protect the environment and mitigate climate
change, improve environmental governance and meet environmental needs, including cross
border cooperation and implementation of multilateral international agreements. Georgia
is working to develop and strengthen its international cooperation on environmental issues,
contributing to the long-term objective of sustainable development and greening the
economy. It is expected that enhanced environment protection will benefit citizens and
businesses in Georgia and contribute to more sustainable production patterns. Through
Open World, delegates will observe how environmental protection issues are addressed in
the United States, which will bring international expertise to improving Georgia’s
environment.
Sustainable Tourism
Rationale: Tourism in Georgia is an economic development priority and the Georgian
National Tourism Administration is focused on developing the country's image and
promoting Georgia as a tourism destination worldwide. The Agency of Protected Areas
09/16/2016 12
(APA) manages Georgia’s nature reserves, national parks, natural monuments, managed
reserves, protected landscapes, biosphere reserves, world heritage sites, and wetland sites of
international importance. APA provides ecotourism services through 20 visitor centers,
tourist trails, and guides. Georgia would benefit from learning more about how the United
States balances preservation with tourism, and how best to create economic opportunities
for local communities. Open World provides an excellent opportunity to help Georgian
professionals learn best practices on management and protection of public lands and parks
and examine the use of education programs with a focus on tourism management.
Best Media Practices/Independent Media
Rationale: The role of independent media is crucial in any democracy for holding
government accountable and keeping citizenry informed and engaged in political processes.
This role acquires more significance for countries like Georgia, where democratic
institutions are still fragile. Georgia’s democratic election cycle is one of the indicators the
country’s development is on the right track. While Georgia’s media is a significant
watchdog in this process, there’s room for professional improvement. An Open World
program coming after the highly-charged Presidential and Parliamentary elections of 2016
in the U.S. and Georgia respectively will provide Georgian media representatives with an
excellent opportunity to learn more about: American media experience in covering not only
the elections, but the election campaign and post-election environment; lessons learned
regarding what works well and what does not; how American journalists draw a line, but at
the same time maintain balance, between the news and editorials; and, relations between
government media communications officers and journalists. Additionally, understanding of
political processes in the United States is important for Georgian journalists and audiences
to battle any misinformation or ambiguity that might exist.
Kazakhstan Themes
Role of Local Legislatures/Staff
Rationale: As part of Open World’s efforts to ensure programming for legislatures and
legislators/staff in its participating countries, programming is planned in the first three
months of the year to coincide when most U.S. state legislators in session for a broad
programming in legislative processes. Recent legislation on local self-governance in
Kazakhstan has been aimed at enhancing the role of the citizen in decisions that are made at
the local level. Despite recent progress, the OSCE has noted that “there are some
outstanding issues related to . . . enhancing the accountability of local authorities, that
should be taken into account in drafting legislation for the next stage of decentralization
reform.” Open World programming focusing on legislative processes would serve as a very
informative guide to the legislators/staffers from Kazakhstan who will participate in this
program. This delegation might also include national level legislators and/or staff.
National Parks/Parks and Recreation
Rationale: Kazakhstan, with its array of flatlands, steppes, taigas, rock-canyons, hills,
deltas, and snow-capped mountains is blessed by having more than ten national parks, and
would like to capitalize on having all this natural beauty by learning Western practices
09/16/2016 13
regarding park conservation and outdoor activity promotion. One aspect of this program,
while furthering the development and understanding of national park management, would
also be to focus on how national parks can be used to further youth programs in Kazakhstan
that are administered by the Ministry of Education and Science Committee on Youth
Policy.
Best Media Practices
Rationale: The press in Kazakhstan is closely controlled by the government, and the few
independent news websites and print outlets have been under very severe pressure from the state
in recent years, with many outlets being banned for “extremism.” Nonetheless, a robust media
environment is breaking through by using internet-based technologies. By providing journalists
from Kazakhstan with exposure to strong journalistic practices and seasoned journalists, best
practices can be explored and lessons learned about the benefits to society of a free press. One
aspect of such programming would also focus on the role of government spokespersons.
School-Based Drug Prevention Program
Rationale: The Republican Centre for Healthy Lifestyles, which has branches in all the
regions of Kazakhstan, plays an active role in the prevention of drug addiction and other
diseases. It supports 17 youth health centers in the country, which provide comprehensive
medical and psychosocial services, taking a friendly, accessible approach towards young
people. For those with a drug problem, the services also include consultation, assistance,
and support. In recent years, a new school subject “Self-knowledge and the moral and
spiritual development of the individual’ was introduced, initially in pre-school education
and then in higher education institutions, which includes interactive sessions that are
devoted to the prevention of drug use and the development of life skills. An Open World
program in this area would be of great benefit to the participants from Kazakhstan as well
as to their American hosts as this is truly one area in which we need to learn from one
another how to defeat the scourge of drug abuse.
Environmental Education
Rationale: The severity of Kazakhstan's ecological problems had led to state agencies and
civic activists building public support for ecological rehabilitation in the country. Part of
this effort is the creation of a comprehensive national program of environmental education
based on Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) principles. During the U.N.
Decade of ESD (2005-2014), sustainability efforts grew across schools, higher education
institutions, non-profits, government agencies, industry, and in faith communities
throughout the United States and there are many best practices to learn and exchange with
education professionals, environmental leaders and educators from Kazakhstan to improve
understanding and awareness of environmental sustainability in the future.
09/16/2016 14
Kosovo Themes
Improving the Organization of Elections and Public Policy for Election Management
Rationale: Kosovo will hold its municipal elections in fall 2017. While the country has
reasonably good legislation to produce free, fair and transparent elections, it faces
numerous challenges in the management of these elections, including developing an
accurate voter list; cooperation with civil society for election administration; and, adequate
civic education programs to motivate public participation. This Open World program will
demonstrate U.S. models and best practices for elections. Participants may include
representatives from the Central Election Commission, the Ministry of Internal Affairs, the
Election Complaints and Appeals Panel, and various non-governmental organizations.
Public Inclusion in the Policy Making Process
Rationale: The Government of Kosovo recognizes the importance of public inclusion in
the policy making process, and adopted a specific regulation for minimal standards of a
public consultation process in 2016. Still, both the government and civil society need to
improve the level of public participation in policy development. Through this program,
government representatives, civil society activists, think-tank professionals, and leaders of
varied interest groups could share best practices for the varying degrees of participation that
shape public policies such as exchanging information, consulting, engaging in dialogue, and
setting up community partnerships.
Multilingualism and Access to Public Information
Rationale: One of the Government of Kosovo’s key social and security priorities is
supporting the development of an inclusive and multi-ethnic society with equal and free
access to information in all official languages at both national and local levels. The
dissemination of information in all official languages is an important pathway to social and
economic development. Kosovo’s past strategies for the protection of language rights and
the integration of Roma, Egyptian and Ashkali communities were largely unimplemented,
limited by institutional capacity, lack of investment, and societal discrimination. This
program would address public policy approaches successful in introducing and promoting
multilingualism and equal and free access to public information in Kosovo, by sharing best
practices from governmental entities, non-governmental organizations, and academia.
Participants may include representatives from the President’s Communities’ Consultative
Council, the Prime Minister’s Office of Communities’ Affairs, the minority-language
public broadcaster RTK2, and other media outlets.
Supporting Judicial Ethics and Discipline
Rationale: Judicial reform in Kosovo is a key priority for the country. Judicial misconduct
and discipline are crucial issues as Kosovo strives to improve the standards and efficiency
of its judges and prosecutors. At present, the judiciary in Kosovo has disciplinary
structures in place, but they lack the financial and managerial autonomy needed for the
effective and objective execution of their duties. This program seeks to expose a wide
range of judicial officials, judges, prosecutors and bar association leaders to the best public
policy and disciplinary approaches with regard to common ethical issues that challenge
every country’s judiciary. Participants may include officials from the Ministry of Justice,
09/16/2016 15
Chief State Prosecutor Office, Kosovo Judicial Council, Kosovo Prosecutorial Council,
Office of the Disciplinary Prosecutor, Ombudsperson, Kosovo Chamber of Advocates, and
Kosovo Judicial Institute.
Education Policies and Planning: Development of an Improved Higher Education Sector
Rationale: The transformation of the higher education system in Kosovo is a key priority
for the Government of Kosovo. With a draft law on higher education currently working its
way through the government, program participants would be interested in best practices in
higher education systems in the U.S., particularly funding mechanisms, institutionalized
cooperation between public universities, minority student integration, and procedures for
faculty promotion—all important components of the current higher education debate.
Furthermore, this program would provide an opportunity to build or continue cooperation
with U.S. educational institutions. Participants may include Ministry of Education officials,
representatives from public universities, and relevant legislative staff.
Kyrgyzstan Themes
Encouraging Women’s STEM Education and Careers
Rationale: There is a systematic underrepresentation of women in technology in
Kyrgyzstan. Changing societal norms and increasing women’s ability and representation in
technical fields will help to ensure the application of technological thinking to the exercise
of finding solutions for issues that particularly affect women, and the development of
opportunities that would particularly benefit them. The program would look at U.S.
programs designed to create programs that create opportunities and encourage girls/women
to participate in STEM education and careers and would be targeted to government officials
and civic leaders charged with development of school curriculums and outside activities,
youth leaders, and advocates of increased opportunities for women.
Best Practices in Adoption
Rationale: In August 2016, Kyrgyzstan acceded to the Hague Convention on adoptions.
Adoption judges and others involved in the adoption process would benefit greatly from
gaining knowledge of U.S. immigration law and judicial procedures on adoption; meeting
with various stakeholders in international adoptions including the key parties in U.S. Hague
Convention adoptions; exploring best practices in international adoptions, special needs
adoptions, and foster care, including the range of support services available to adoptees and
their families; examining the role and work of social service agencies as part of the child
welfare system; and learning about post-adoption issues and good practices in post-
adoption follow-up services and support.
Young Entrepreneurs
Rationale: With one-third of the population living below the poverty line and 85 percent of
the land exposed to erosion, young people in Kyrgyzstan are playing an increasingly
important role as business leaders and entrepreneurs, and they are looking for successful
business models as they take their place in modern Kyrgyz society. The Open World
program for this group will focus on strategies to establish and promote small
09/16/2016 16
entrepreneurial businesses. Programming activity should include providing exposure to
leadership skills, and be aimed at increasing the effectiveness of young peoples’ activity
and competency in the economic sphere. The U.S. program should also introduce effective
public and media strategies for emerging businesses, and include roundtable discussions on
strategic planning for business development.
Domestic/Gender-Based Violence – Victims’ Rights and Prosecution of Perpetrators
Rationale: Domestic violence continues to be a major problem in Kyrgyzstan with high
rates of abuse and very few prosecutions of offenders. This program would take
prosecutors and civic leaders to the United States to see how victims are cared for and how
criminal proceedings against perpetrators of violence are conducted. Emphasis would be
placed on the importance of formal prosecution to achieve justice, changing societal
thinking on domestic violence as a “family matter”, and deterring future acts of domestic
violence in communities.
Russia Themes
Social Entrepreneurship for Women
Rationale: Social entrepreneurship is becoming more and more widespread in Russia.
Leading corporations are adapting business approaches to solve social problems, and in the
labor market there is a demand for professionals with experience in changing the local
environment for the better. There is a lag in Russian development of social entrepreneurship
as the concept is not usually introduced in high school or earlier. This program will provide
an excellent chance for leading socially-conscious women to hone their skills and make
social entrepreneurship more broadly accepted in Russia. A focus of the program will be
the design and implementation of socially conscious programming aimed at families and
children such as bookmobiles and music/entertainment events.
Women Leaders in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math)
Rationale: At a Graduate Women International Conference in Cape Town, South Africa in
August 2016, a new Russian-American initiative was announced to expand women’s
professional contribution in the STEM fields. Changing societal norms and increasing
women’s ability and representation in technical fields will help to ensure the application of
technological thinking to the exercise of finding solutions for issues that particularly affect
women, and the development of opportunities that would particularly benefit them. The
program would look at U.S. programs designed to create programs that create opportunities
and encourage girls/women to participate in STEM education and careers and would be
targeted to government officials and civic leaders charged with development of school
curriculums and outside activities, youth leaders, and advocates of increased opportunities
for girls and women.
Women in Politics
Rationale: Although Russia has a relatively large share of female political leaders in
regional legislatures, the number of influential women decreases sharply at the top of both
the legislative and executive branch. Many young Russian women either do not view
09/16/2016 17
politics as a worthwhile venture or do not believe they can successfully partake in
it. Russia also lacks formal mentorship programs for female politicians that have thrived
elsewhere. This program would engage Russian women at the start of their political careers
and link them with American leaders and organizations engaged in political mentorship of
women. The goals are to: build relationships with Russia’s future leaders; increase the
capacity of Russian women to organize and reach the highest echelons of politics and civil
society; and encourage Russian women active in politics to develop mentorship networks.
The program could include meetings with successful women that are active in state and
national political parties, legislatures, and administrations; workshops with American
female political mentorship clubs and organizations; and, meetings with female-led civil
society organizations engaged in political lobbying.
Community-Focused Women Entrepreneurs in Sister Cities (Five Groups)
Rationale: Agreements, both formal and informal, between American and Russian sister
cities/regions/clubs have long existed. Many of the cities/clubs that still maintain such
relations were formed during the Soviet era, and in the early days of the Russian Federation
(1990s). As these partnerships matured, the focus changed to sustainable development of
economic and human resources, and the promotion of trade. In recent years,
entrepreneurship and innovation has taken root in Russia. Departments and ministries on
the federal and regional level now provide support and infrastructure to small and medium
sized businesses. A new generation of women in Russia has now started taking risks to
start new businesses and reinvent small businesses currently owned by family
members. Women entrepreneurs from Perm, St. Petersburg, Tyumen, Vladivostok, and
Volgograd are eager to visit their sister cities and clubs in the U.S. to exchange best
practices and discuss opportunities for joint ventures and expanding their enterprises
abroad. These programs will be aimed at hosts that either have ongoing partnerships with
these cities/regions or indicate that they are able to sustain such relationships.
Livable City Planning
Rationale: Russia’s cities are the product of mid-20th
century central planning and more
recent economic collapse and subsequent gradual economic revival. Increased vehicle
ownership and internal migration over the past 20 years has strained existing infrastructure
and contributed to congestion and increased carbon pollution in regional centers. To
address this problem, a growing group of civic activists promoting livable cities and
sustainable transportation grids has developed across Russia. Initial successes have shown
that data driven analysis, wide stakeholder involvement, and effective community outreach
and networking are needed for the creation of effective policies and planning programs that
address both climate change and sustainable economic growth. What city planners and
community activists do individually and in unison to address climate change and promote
livable cities can set the agenda for communities and governments everywhere. The Open
World program for this theme should focus on data-driven public policy decision making,
inclusive decision making processes in municipal settings, alternative financing options for
climate change infrastructure improvement, and public outreach in change settings. In
addition, the program should encourage professional ties with U.S. city planning
professions and activists for the New Urbanism, and provide a forum to discuss means to
09/16/2016 18
support and sustain community networks across distances, whether in Russia or
internationally. Participants may include city planners, civic activists, and local journalists.
Think Tanks
Rationale: In general, Russian think-tanks have become promoters of Russian policies, and
there is very little room for constructive criticism of the government let alone significant
critical or investigative analyses. Russians do have the skills and technologies to further
innovation and contribute, both academically and in an entrepreneurial manner, in the
policy arena, but improvements/advancements in their independence, practices and
management would be beneficial to promoting a freer and more-informed society, and
would further innovation in the country. An Open World program in this theme would
include meeting with various think-tank and innovation leaders in the United States and
further a dialogue to develop insightful and more constructive institutions in both
countries. Participants include researchers and analysts in innovation/entrepreneurship and
non-governmental organizations.
Use of DNA Analysis to Deter Illegal Logging
Rationale: Forests cover approximately half of Russia’s land mass and are an
environmental resource that is critical to world climate stabilization. Moreover, Russia’s
forests provide important habitats for a number of threatened plant and animal species.
Logging increases global warming with heightened carbon emissions and elevates the risks
of landslides through the loss of watersheds. The World Bank estimates that annually,
illegally cleared land globally is equivalent to the size of Ireland. Money earned from trade
in illegal timber products has been estimated by Interpol to equal $30 billion annually.
Russia is the world’s largest exporter of logs. The demand for high-value timber is fueling
trade in logs sourced illegally. In 2013, data indicated that the volume of illegal logging in
Russia had increased nearly 70%. While some of the illegal logging is tied to organized
crime, a significant volume is also tied to legal entities exceeding valid logging permits –
harvesting more than they are allowed or taking species that aren’t permitted. Poor law
enforcement in Russia facilitates the trade in illegal timber. This illegal trade in timber
creates an abundance of stolen timber which depresses prices, slashes margins and deters
investing in better timber-management practices. Therefore, Russia’s enforcement issues
become a world-wide problem. The U.S. has a legal basis, through the Lacey Act, to hold
U.S. companies accountable for wood products that are determined to be illegally
sourced. Additionally new technologies allow law enforcement to pinpoint the species and
origin of a piece of timber through DNA testing. This Open World program proposal is to
bring individuals from Russia’s forestry and timber industry sector to the U.S. to learn
about the criminal justice framework and the investigative and testing techniques that
enable U.S. law enforcement to battle the trade in illegally sourced timber. A preferable
hosting location would have laboratory and testing facilities for forest genetics, U.S. Forest
Service research facilities, and “good” industry players to demonstrate a
workable/cooperative enforcement mechanism.
Organic Certification
Rationale: Russia’s organic produce sector is in its nascent stages, still lacking legislated
standards or definitions for labeling. There does exist a small domestic niche market for
09/16/2016 19
‘organic’ products, and some forward-looking producers are seeking to position themselves
for future growth opportunities both domestically and on the export market, but domestic
consumption remains extremely low and most consumers do not distinguish between
‘natural’ and ‘organic’ products. The definition of ‘organic’ and its benefits to consumers
and the environment is not clear to consumers. A draft federal law on organic agriculture is
currently moving through the Russian legislature, but there remains much debate on the
standards to be adopted and potential trade impacts. As such, there is great interest in how
organic programs and markets function in other countries, particularly in the United
States. The program will acquaint leaders in Russia’s organic produce sector with how
organic programs and markets function in the U.S.; promote the use of robust,
internationally recognized standards in Russia’s organic produce sector; and introduce
bilateral contacts to advance the development of Russia’s organic produce infrastructure.
Forest Management
Rationale: Russian protected areas are sites of exceptional biodiversity, and Russian
protected area managers could gain from U.S. experience on habitation conservation, long
term management planning, and scientific research. Program participants will meet with
their U.S. counterparts to examine how forests, refuges, and parks protect biodiversity and
how national level management helps inform lower-level activities. Overall, this program
should highlight U.S. strategies for managing national and state forests, refuges, parks and
other natural heritage sites to meet the often conflicting goals of natural and cultural
resource protection and viable local economic development. Participants will examine the
U.S. national forest, refuge, park and protected area management systems, trends in
biodiversity conservation and wildlife management, and explore how the private sector can
provide input and support for scientific research. The project will foster discussion among
field experts and local communities on the roles of governments and the private sector in
biodiversity preservation and forest/refuge/park management.
Ecotourism in National Parks, Refuges, and Reserves
Rationale: Russian protected areas can potentially serve as a source for both revenue and
environmental education within Russia. Some Russians that live in protected areas worry
that a culture of ecotourism does not exist in Russia and tourism can only be detrimental to
nature reserves. Russian protected area managers see the U.S. system of national parks as
a model and many Russians are working to create a culture change within their system in
relation to ecotourism. These younger Russian park managers are seeking to help the
Russian national park system better develop its outreach and visitor education programs,
including the use of visitor centers. This program will support the goal of developing
environmental/green tourism in and around national parks in Russia. The program will also
help support Russian civil society, by fostering the establishment of “friends of parks”
associations and societies, which are organized to assist national parks and nature reserves
through volunteer work and the collection of private donations. This program should
demonstrate ways to attract more tourists to national parks, hands on training in
environmental education, proper ways to develop new trails for various age groups of
tourists, and associated tourist infrastructure. This visit would give Russian experts a better
understanding of how U.S. park management works and explain the important difference
between total numbers of visits a year and total number of visitors. Park managers need to
09/16/2016 20
understand that frequent visitors have different expectations of service than one time
tourists. It is recommend that the hosting location be situated near a national
park/refuge/reserve with recognized excellence in outreach and visitor support activities,
and ecotourism, especially parks that have established partnerships with “friends” societies
and other NGOs that support them.
Legacy Waste Remediation
Rationale: During the Soviet era, heedless development tied to physical production quotas
made concern for the environmental consequences of industrial processes a secondary
one. Metallurgical and chemical facilities conducted environmentally destructive
practices. Hazardous and toxic waste products were often dumped into quickly prepared
landfills or other storage facilities. The new private owners of former state industrial
enterprises often do not consider waste dumps created during the Soviet era to be their
property. The result is that thousands of hazardous legacy waste sites remain abandoned,
sites which pose a serious hazard to air, water, and land quality, and to the health of local
residents.
While the Russian government recognizes the problem and has identified legacy waste
sites, it has been slow to take concrete steps to address the problem. Site remediation
requires strategies for engagement with nearby communities, and in the U.S. the EPA has
developed strategies in this area. This program would allow for Russian specialists
engaged in legacy waste remediation to visit remediated sites in the U.S. and learn best
technical, management, and public outreach practices. They will also see how green
technologies can be used to manage/control hazardous waste. Participants may include
regional and local officials, environmental NGO leaders, other community leaders, and
environmental journalists.
Best Media Practices/Independent Media
Rationale: Most Russian media outlets are now owned or controlled by the state or by
private individuals or companies loyal to the Russian government. These media outlets
have been aggressive in supporting the Russian position regarding relations with the West
and the hostilities in Ukraine. Coverage even by independent media in Russia is restrained
by Western standards, with direct criticism of President Putin quite rare. An Open World
program will allow for Russian media managers and investigative journalists to observe the
vital and robust role of the press in Western society, and compare journalistic practices in
both countries and the world at large with their colleagues.
Successful Blogging
Rationale: In 2014, a new blogger law was introduced in Russia subjecting bloggers with
more than 3,000 daily readers to the same rules as professional journalists – mandatory
registration of their sites and as journalists/bloggers. The law has impacted sharing of
information by IT developers and has led to self-censorship. Vague anti-terror laws have
also caused concern for bloggers on what can be perceived as treason or extremist support
by authorities. Blogs (originally weblogs) are online sources of opinion, reflection, and
learning shared with readers and through other digital media. Successful blogs are
accessible, informative, and at times, entertaining. The program will explore what works,
networking, branding, funding, and other relevant topics.
09/16/2016 21
Inclusive Education
Rationale: Since Sept. 2014, all schools in Russia must include children with disabilities
and new standards on inclusive education will go into effect in September 2016. There are
more than 500,000 children with disabilities in Russia and nearly 200,000 are still
segregated in residential institutions and special (correctional) schools or isolated in their
homes, and more than 13,000 of these children receive no education at all. Civic
organizations estimate that there are another 1.5 million children who have special
education needs and are getting little or no support. Although more than 20,000 children
with disabilities attended mainstream schools in 2014/2015, the majority of them still do
not receive sufficient support, or are in separate classrooms or are home schooled or in
distance learning programs. Despite these improvements, Russian schools and teachers
lack the skills and knowledge to include children with disabilities in their classrooms. Some
barriers are: most schools and public transportation are still inaccessible; educators lack the
knowledge, skills and resources to support these children in mainstream settings; teachers
lack skills, knowledge and information about inclusive instruction methods; parents have
little information about their children’s rights to inclusive education services and how to
advocate for them; and many myths and stereotypes about children with disabilities still
exist. This Open World program should include site visits and discussions on inclusive
education, teaching methods, and information and new technologies that can facilitate
inclusive education. Participants may include education leaders with disabilities, teachers,
professors, and parents of disabled children representing NGOs.
Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD)
Rationale: It is estimated by several sources that more than 200,000 Russians live with
autism. The disorder is caused by underdevelopment in the brain and can manifest in a lack
of communication skills, speech defects, and erratic behavior due to changes in routine. In
the last five years in Russia as in other countries, there has been an increase in young
children diagnosed with ASD and an increase in services to people with ASD by both
governmental and non-governmental organizations. Attitudes inherited from the Soviet
Union persist, with expectations that people with ASD ought to be institutionalized or kept
at home, and public rebuke of children with ASD who may be disruptive in public
places. But, things are changing, and there has been a lessening of the stigma related to
certain disabilities in general. Moscow now has a movie theater that specifically welcomes
ASD families, which allows families to venture outside their homes. The Open World
program for this theme will allow the participants to meet with their professional
counterparts who treat those with ASD, parents, and patients, and to visit organizations that
provide services and support to those with ASD.
Social Integration of Children and Adults with Mental Impairments
Rationale: Russians with mental impairments are often vulnerable, neglected, and
excluded from society. Despite some progress in integrating disability issues into the
economic, legal, educational, and social agenda, the needs of people with mental
impairments, including people with Down Syndrome and Autism Spectrum Disorder, are
ignored by a large portion of Russian society. Orphaned children and youth with mental
impairments are generally admitted to state institutions where they live in inhumane
environments—deprived of education, employment opportunities, and basic human
09/16/2016 22
rights. There is no state-funded social support system to assist people with mental
impairments and their families outside of the state institution system. Despite these
obstacles, there are a number of inspiring local non-governmental organizations that are
actively advocating for the rights of the mentally impaired. Adequate legislation, health
insurance, economic and social incentives, education and training are needed to build a
sufficient infrastructure of social support for people with mental impairments and their
families in Russia. It would be beneficial for Russian NGO activists, educators, and
socially-oriented business people working to promote inclusion and tolerance to learn from
the American experience of integrating people with mental impairments into general
society. This program would equip the Russian professional community with new ideas,
materials, and contacts in this field.
Accessible Cities
Rationale: The UN Convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities (Article 2),
ratified in 2013 by the Russian Federation, defines “universal design” as the design of
products, environments, programs and services to be usable by all people, to the greatest
extent possible, without the need for adaptation or specialized design. In 2016 legislation
went into force that requires services, buildings and public spaces in Russia to be broadly
accessible and the Ministry of Trade is planning to establish a Center on Universal Design
in 2017. Universal design is a very new concept for Russia where accessibility is still not
widespread. Although, Russia recently passed legislation that guarantees fully accessible
services for persons with disabilities, there are still only a small number of specialists who
have the knowledge, skills and vision to design buildings or organize the space so that it is
accessible and welcoming for a wide range of people. Many businesses are committed to
making their premises fully inclusive but there is limited expertise in this area. The Open
World program should include an exchange of best practices and innovative ideas on
making cities accessible for individuals with disabilities. The programming also should
include discussions as to how to positively influence legislative/regulatory processes to
advance accessibility practices.
Indigenous Groups of Russia (Finno-Ugric, Arctic Regions, and Others – Two Groups)
Rationale: The indigenous people of Russia face the pressure of assimilation and they tend
to live in economically marginalized areas. Indigenous people throughout Russia have lost
the ability to pursue their traditional way of life in areas where resource extraction occurs,
and alcoholism and suicide amongst Russian indigenous groups, many who live in the
Arctic, is higher than the Russian population at large. In particular, the Finno-Ugric
peoples of Russia face pressures of assimilation, and the loss of their native languages.
Assimilation is taking place against a background of depopulation of Finno-Ugric areas
through migration and low birth rates, leading to a further decline of economic opportunity
in these impoverished regions. These ethnic groups often also lack a familiarity with
modern information technology and the role it can play in language preservation. During
their Open World program, participants will learn about strategies in the U.S. that ensure
hunting and fishing rights for indigenous communities and other ways to preserve their
economic viability. Indigenous activists focused on language and cultural preservation
could learn from Native Americans such as the Navajo who have made great strides in
recording their language. Through this program young indigenous leaders would be given
09/16/2016 23
the chance to familiarize themselves with the system of governance that exists on Indian
reservations and the use of digital technology to preserve language and cultural heritage.
Think Tanks – Muslim Inter-Ethnic Issues
Rationale: In a region susceptible to radical extremism, debates regarding measures to
counter extremism and discussions promoting deeper understanding of the Islamic faith are
key to maintaining peace locally and fighting radicalized terror internationally. Through
their Open World program, Russia experts in Islam and inter-ethnic issues will meet their
American counterparts (and other experts in the U.S.) to explore efforts to educate the
public regarding the Muslim faith and its practices and discuss methods to lessen the
devastating radicalization of those that would use faith for nefarious purposes both locally
and globally.
Serbia Themes
Higher Education System
Rationale: Serbia is currently undertaking higher education reform to bring its system
closer to the ones adopted in most European countries under the Bologna Declaration and
its recommendations. This has been a long and painful process in Serbia, particularly at
some state universities. This program would expose important higher-education decision-
makers in Serbia to alternative ways of accrediting courses that students take outside their
host institution and allowing internships to become part of curricula, to be more in line with
the demands of today’s job market, and creating a higher education system that would
enable more practical and hands-on knowledge for students, all with the utmost aim of
making Serbia a more democratic society, with better economic opportunities for future
generations. The participants will see, learn and hopefully adopt some higher education
practices in the U.S., such as: systems of accrediting courses and how accreditation allows
for mobility of students; internships and how they can be integrated into the course
curriculum; the U.S. approach to lifelong learning (e.g., how universities accommodate the
needs of working students); and mentoring programs. Participants may include mid-level
managers and decision-makers in the Serbian Ministry of Education and Science and the
National Education Council, as well as Serbian university administrators and
representatives.
Food Security and Food Safety
Rationale: Contributing almost ten percent to total GDP, agriculture is key to increasing
economic prosperity and stability in Serbia. It is the only sector that has consistently
registered a foreign trade surplus. A goal of the program is to address food security and
food safety challenges by demonstrating how food and market systems are developed to
expand trade and economic growth. At the same time, the program will explore how
regulatory environment can be developed so that it encourages trade, both imports and
exports. This activity would further develop a much needed foundation of trained experts
who can craft and implement progressive agricultural policies for the country and help
ensure global food security objectives are met as well. Through this program Serbian
participants will be introduced to the existing food safety system in the United States, the
09/16/2016 24
world’s largest importer of agri-food products. Participants will be able to: examine U.S.
policies and programs relating to food safety and sustainable climate/smart agriculture;
learn about the political, social, environmental, and economic forces that influence U.S.
agricultural trade policies; explore how U.S. food commodities are regulated and marketed
from farm- to- table and globally; and assess how federal, regional and local programs for
agricultural research, inspection, trade promotion, resource conservation help ensure U.S.
agricultural competitiveness in the global marketplace, while safeguarding the public and
the environment through prevention and reaction mechanisms that ensure public health.
Participants may include government officials from the Ministry of Agriculture and
Environmental Protection, Ministry of Health, scientists and academics from Serbian
university departments and scientific institutes, representatives of NGOs involved in food
security and safety, and agricultural journalists.
Building E-Government Capacity: Training Government Officials to Use Social Media for
Reaching Citizens More Effectively
Rationale: Social media, when used well, allows governments to connect with their
citizens directly and respond promptly to their concerns. Civil servants can provide:
information on government services, respond to emergencies and health crises and increase
transparency. Current government social media messages in Serbia are little more than
digital press releases at this time. Through an Open World program, Serbian participants
can learn how e-government can expand to serve the Serbian people by including
programming that demonstrates: digital and social media playing an essential role in the
process of government process (in this case timely exposure to all aspects of the European
Union integration process); a digital amber alert system for wanted criminals and warnings
of natural disasters and/or emergency situations; public service announcements; and
tourism promotion.
Young Political Leaders
Rationale: As Serbia continues to develop its democratic institutions, members of political
parties state that they need to have a solid model on which to build their political
perspectives. Young activists from major political parties would benefit from learning
about the U.S. political system and U.S. politics. This program would have young
members of legitimate political parties observe and understand how the political system in
the U.S. works. Exposure to an established representative governing structure that responds
to constituency needs will help the future generation of Serbian politicians learn how to
govern and legislate more effectively. Lessons learned will pay dividends well into the
future when young leaders put into practice democratic values and processes. It will also
build bridges between the future leaders of Serbia and the political leaders/structures of the
United States.
Tajikistan Themes
Role of Women in Countering Violent Extremism
Rationale: Tajikistan is a predominantly Muslim country with a fragile economy and poor
prospects for employment. The economic downturn and diminishing employment
09/16/2016 25
opportunities leaves the potential for young people to be restless and alienated. This Open
World program will examine the role of women, both in the family and in the community,
in countering the influence of violent extremism. The delegates should meet with
community activists in inner cities, church groups or other influential grassroots
organizations to see how women in society can be incorporated in the battle against violent
extremism.
Innovation, Technology, and Start-ups
Rationale: The vast majority of internet users in Tajikistan access the internet via smart
phones. Some of them have begun developing applications (apps). There is tremendous
potential for growth in this sector, but there is little formal education in innovation,
technology or start-ups. This Open World delegation should meet small web-developers,
programmers and other innovators in the field to look at how this growth could be pursued
in Tajikistan.
Physicians and Mental Health and Well-being
Rationale: Tajikistan’s health care system is rudimentary, particularly outside of the main
cities of Dushanbe and Khujand. Medical facilities and their attendant physicians lack the
necessary training to diagnose and treat developmental disabilities or mental illnesses.
Participants on an Open World program focusing on this topic would visit appropriate
facilities in the U.S., particularly those that cater to low-income areas, to look at how to
provide mental health and well-being treatment and therapy in areas where there is not
much awareness of these conditions and practices.
Ecotourism
Rationale: Tajikistan has a visually spectacular landscape, with 90 percent of its land
covered by mountains. Despite its potential, the tourism industry here is nascent. Having
an Open World delegation visit and learn from tour outfitters, guide companies, and eco-
lodges in the United States could help ecotourism leaders from Tajikistan learn how to
develop their industry, how to advertise to adventure tourists, and how to develop the
industry in a way that is environmentally responsible and protects this country’s fragile
natural resources, particularly its water resources.
Domestic Violence Prevention
Rationale: Domestic violence remains a serious issue in Tajikistan, and there are not a lot
of options or advocacy for victims. This delegation should visit shelters and advocacy
groups to discuss how battered women can be protected and cared for, and how
organizations can speak on their behalf. In addition, they should learn more about how to
conduct public awareness campaigns aimed at stopping domestic violence.
Turkmenistan Themes
Women Entrepreneurs
Rationale: Developing business domestically is one of the top priorities for the government
of Turkmenistan. Despite the increase in the number of small businesses in the last few
09/16/2016 26
years, women business leaders are few. Successful women entrepreneurs could serve as a
role model for a younger generation of women and allow local economies to prosper.
Participants may include members of the Union of Entrepreneurs and Industrialists of
Turkmenistan.
E-governance for Hospital Staff
Rationale: Turkmenistan has been introducing electronic systems in government agencies.
As part of a nationwide effort, all hospitals in Turkmenistan have instituted an electronic
patient database. Meeting with American colleagues will allow medical specialists from
Turkmenistan to learn of their experience in all aspects of patient databases such as: the
information they contain that allows for efficient and effective patient care; statistical and
medical research information; and, policies regarding the privacy of patient records.
Participants may include officials from the Ministry of Health and administrators and staff
from regional hospitals.
Journalism
Rationale: All print and broadcast media are controlled by the government of
Turkmenistan, but some non-governmental journalists work in the country. They are
representatives of foreign media accredited in Turkmenistan. The foreign outlets rely on
local stringers and freelancers to cover domestic stories. Sending accredited non-
governmental journalists on Open World will help them improve their professional
capability and the quality of material they publish.
Ukraine Themes
Legislative Development (Four Delegations)
Rationale: As part of Open World’s efforts to ensure programming for legislatures and
legislators/staff in its participating countries, programming is planned in the first three
months of the year to coincide when most U.S. state legislatures are in session for broad
programming in legislative processes. Ukraine is currently in the process of overhauling
much of the legislative basis for its education and health (and all other) systems as it works
for greater transparency, battles the forces of corruption that are endemic to its society, and
devolves power from the center to the regions/localities through the process of
decentralization. As noted on the calendar, there are four groups that will be formed:
Health Care; Education; Women Legislators, and Women Staffers. These groups will
consist of legislators and staffers (and those advising these bodies on both the national and
regional/local level).
Combatting Human Trafficking (Two Delegations)
Rationale: Ukraine is a source, transit, and destination country for men, women, and
children subjected to forced labor and sex trafficking, and human trafficking remains an
acute problem in the country. The problem is addressed in numerous laws and
implementing regulations. The Ministry of Social Policy is the government agency that
coordinates the activities of national and regional (local) government bodies working to
combat human trafficking. The Ministry reviews all human trafficking cases, decides
09/16/2016 27
whether to grant an individual the status of a human trafficking victim, and runs
rehabilitation facilities for the victims. Because of the ongoing conflict between Russia and
Ukraine, over 1.3 million people have been displaced since March 1, 2014. According to
experts, these people are especially vulnerable to exploitation. There have been reports of
kidnappings from conflict-affected areas for the purpose of sex and labor trafficking, as
well as employing minors as soldiers and informants or using them as human shields.
Ukraine has declared its adherence to international standards for combatting human
trafficking and these two delegations (one looking at issues of human trafficking in the sex
trade and one looking at migrant labor/labor exploitation) will assist it as it better develops
its ability to prevent such actions.
NGOs Combatting Poverty/Homelessness and Supporting Needy Children (Two
Delegations)
Rationale: The Government of Ukraine and its people are in the process of transition to
democratic governance, a market-based economy, and integration into the global economic
system (including European integration). Prosperity for all Ukrainians is the objective and
poverty elimination is a necessity. For a long time the number of people living below the
poverty line in Ukraine was gradually decreasing. However, due to the conflict in the
eastern part of the country this number is increasing again. Families with children are the
most vulnerable group, making up the largest and the poorest segment of society. One third
of households with children currently live below the poverty line, and Ukraine’s currency is
rapidly devaluing. An Open World program in this theme will focus on methods of poverty
alleviation and practices used in the provision of a “safety net.” Practical community-based
solutions to such problems should be scheduled as well as exposure to national-level
programs, as well as the debates around such policies.
LGBT Issues in Society (Two Delegations)
Rationale: After a democratically elected government came to power following the 2014
Maidan protests, Ukrainian authorities have been more supportive of the LGBT rights
movement, despite the country's widespread lack of support for gay rights. In June 2016,
Western diplomats joined with nearly a thousand gay rights activists, some wearing the
European Union flags, others in national Ukrainian dress, under the protection of several
thousand police. While this is definitely seen as progress, the road to equality and true civil
rights for the LGBT community is still an uphill one and much organization skill is needed.
This programming will be aimed at increasing the capacity of the leadership of the LGBT
community in Ukraine to organize impactful events (such a Pride events) and increase its
effectiveness in protecting and securing the rights of those in the LGBT community.
Issues of Internally Displaced Persons/Crimean Tatars (Two Delegations)
Rationale: Due to Russia’s annexation of Crimea and the hostilities in the South and East
of Ukraine, there has been a significant increase in the number of refugees and IDPs (more
than 1.3 million with a significant number of these IDPs being Crimean Tatars) that are in
great need of relocation strategies, sustenance, and psychological support. The Open World
host for this programming will demonstrate U.S. policy toward refugees and IDPs, and will
openly discuss the debate in this country regarding policy and implementation issues, with
09/16/2016 28
the goal of sharing best practices and finding commonality in response to this issue in both
countries.
Role of Integrity in the Education System (Two Delegations)
Rationale: Ukraine is a highly literate society with a strong and proud history of education
at all levels, although the level of education in metropolitan areas is generally higher than
that in rural areas. The country has made it a priority to ensure equal access to a quality
education for rural and low-income students and to enhance the professionalism of
educators, and has made great strides in its standardization of testing to fight corruption in
this sector. As of this school year (2016), Ukraine has opened 24 “hub” schools with the
goal of improving the quality of education for children in rural areas as well as to improve
the effectiveness of the use of public funds for education. In the course of the project, one
school was selected in each region to receive funding for new equipment and additional
material supply. These hub schools shall receive resources for the renovation of their class
rooms, learning equipment and IT applications aimed to provide high quality of school
education for children living and going to school in rural areas. In support of these
initiatives, these Open World delegations will explore best practices in educational systems
development during their visit to the United States and will have the opportunity to
compare and exchange information with leading educational administrators at all levels.
Role of Innovators/Entrepreneurs in Society
Rationale: Ukraine is making great strides in encouraging innovation and entrepreneurship
as a way of growing its economy and developing new opportunities for its citizens outside
the old corrupt systems. Exemplifying such initiative was the recent loan guarantee deal
made by the European Investment Fund that offers small and medium sized companies
(below 500 employees) easier access to risk capital for the development of innovative ideas.
Ukraine is one of the largest and best educated countries in Europe, with an excellent base
of talent and technology infrastructure, including high quality, low cost workforce. This has
many people wondering “could Ukraine be the next Silicon Valley.” Programming for this
theme will demonstrate how innovation and entrepreneurship is encouraged and supported
in the United States in both the private and public sectors.
Women Technology Entrepreneurs
Rationale: There is a vital need to improve the opportunities for women in Ukrainian
society, as they have been underpaid and limited by societal norms. This program, similar
to the above program for innovators/entrepreneurs will demonstrate how innovation and
entrepreneurship is encouraged and supported in the United States in both the private and
public sectors, and will emphasize existing initiatives aimed at promoting women’s
participation in this future-oriented activity by such programs as Google’s Women
Techmakers, which regularly launches “global scalable initiatives” and pilots “new
programs to support and empower women in the industry.”
NGOs/Civil Society (Eight Groups)
Rationale: Across sectors, Ukraine’s robust and independent NGO sector is experiencing
growing pains and now maturing to the point where skills in advocacy, sustainability,
management, professionalism and goal-setting are needed. While the U.S. programs for
09/16/2016 29
these delegations will also focus on the subtheme with an understanding of the current
status of such activity in Ukraine (Advocacy, E-Governance, Children with Disabilities,
Family Services, and Youth Development and Workers), these programs will emphasize
leadership skills and responsibilities. The subthemes chosen for this program reflect
relatively new concepts for Ukrainian society (especially, how best to utilize volunteerism),
so there is much to learn from the vibrant public and/or private initiatives that can be found
in communities across the United States as efforts are made to improve the standard of
living and conditions for all citizens.
PTSD and Reintegration/Medical Practitioners and Social Workers (Two Groups)
Rationale: More than two years into a totally unforeseen conflict that has seen men and
women plucked from their everyday lives and thrown into battle (often without training),
medical practitioners, psychologists, and social workers are fighting their own battle on two
fronts: working to prepare for the long-term psychological effect on this generation with
regard to post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and struggling to get these professions
recognized as important. The problems of PTSD are not confined to individual soldiers’
lives. They create a complex psychosocial phenomenon that affects the soldier, the soldier’s
immediate family, and the community at large. PTSD can result in difficulties with
reintegration, securing and keeping jobs, maintaining a normal family life, and taking care
of one’s health. The problem of psychological rehabilitation for Ukraine’s soldiers cannot
be put on the back burner. In September 2014, with advice from volunteer groups, the
government created its own psychological service and a state agency for veteran affairs and
for volunteers from the battles in Crimea and the East of Ukraine. These agencies are
working to devise a unified government policy on the subject. Nevertheless, the majority of
psychological support provided for soldiers and veterans continues to be shouldered by
volunteer psychologists; and Ukraine’s ability to serve its demobilized soldiers is hampered
by an economic crisis and a shortage of funds. Open World programming is aimed at filling
a critical knowledge and practice gap in Ukraine among medical practitioners and social
workers (many of whom are volunteers) as they best seek to serve those that have served
their country and are now suffering.
Environmental Protection (Two Groups)
Rationale: Ukraine’s environmental problems include the nuclear contamination that
resulted from the 1986 Chernobyl accident, which affected some ten percent of its land with
unsafe levels of radiation. Unsafe amounts of polluted water, heavy metals, organic
compounds, and oil-related pollutants are routinely released into the country’s air and water
reserves. In some areas of the country, the water supply contains toxic industrial chemicals
up to ten times the concentration considered to be safe, and pollution to the country’s air
and water needs to be ameliorated, as does the country’s need to improve its municipal
waste management practices, recycling technologies, renewable sources of energy, and use
of information technology to promote greener energy usage. For such programming,
Ukrainian environmental experts will observe effective environmental conservation
practices in the United States, and they will discuss openly with their American colleagues
problems faced by both countries and potential solutions to them.
09/16/2016 30
Countering False Information/Media Literacy (Three Groups)
Rationale: According to one article “the age of information has mutated into the age of
disinformation.” Authoritarian rulers have entrenched their power in Ukraine by flooding it
with disinformation that divides, confuses, and destabilizes. A range of international
bodies, from the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) to NATO,
have identified Media Literacy—the ability of audiences to think critically and objectively
analyze data—as a key way to withstand the information war, lies, and hate speech.
However, Media Literacy has always been associated with education in schools and
universities (where efforts need to be redoubled) and to have real influence, it needs to be
incorporated more broadly into mainstream media and entertainment in general, and critical
thinking and fact-checking needs to be a part of the educational process from an early age.
During an Open World program, delegations will work with seasoned journalists and media
professionals to see how they expose false reporting/information and search for objectivity
(or explain the role of bias); they will also have programming demonstrating how society
can be better prepared to think critically, check facts, and respond to disinformation in
effective ways.
Civic Rule of Law – Combatting Domestic Violence
Rationale: Domestic violence continues to be a major problem in Ukraine with high rates
of abuse and very few prosecutions of offenders. This program would take prosecutors and
civic leaders to the United States to see how victims are cared for and how criminal
proceedings against perpetrators of violence are conducted. Emphasis would be placed on
the importance of formal prosecution to achieve justice, changing societal thinking on
domestic violence as a “family matter,” and deterring future acts of domestic violence in
communities.
Civic Rule of Law – Combatting Human Trafficking
Rationale: As noted above, Ukraine is a source, transit, and destination country for men,
women, and children subjected to forced labor and sex trafficking, and human trafficking
remains an acute problem in the country. Human trafficking is a crime prosecuted under
the Criminal Code, and the National Police together with the State Border Guard Service
are the two major law enforcement agencies involved in investigating and prosecuting this
crime. While Ukraine has the infrastructure to combat Human Trafficking, its legal
professionals lack the skills and knowledge as to how to best join this battle effectively. An
Open World program under this topic will explore the legal means by which trafficking is
fought in the United States and internationally.
Civic Rule of Law – Anti-Corruption Practices/E-Governance and Transparency
Rationale: The existence of rule of law that provides an even playing field and that fights
illegal activity such as corruption is one of the foundations of a society that effectively uses
its economic resources. The government of Ukraine is currently working to strengthen the
accountability and transparency of key bodies such as judicial institutions, representatives
of the legal profession, and activists pushing for further Lustration (prosecution and
punishment of corrupt officials) and Reanimation packages (progressive laws fighting
corruption and aimed to further European Integration). On January 25, 2015, a new anti-
corruption law took effect in Ukraine as part of a comprehensive legislative initiative
09/16/2016 31
targeting corruption among government employees, public officials, and private legal
entities, and strengthening the country’s previous anti-corruption regulations. This
legislation also created a national Anti-Corruption Bureau, which has yet to function
effectively. An Open World program in this area would provide delegates with significant
exposure to anti-corruption practices in the United States and the legal structure and
processes that further anti-corruption efforts.
Improved English Language Education – Secondary Schools (Two Programs)
Rationale: With Ukraine looking westward there is a great need to improve its educational
infrastructure for the teaching and understanding of English. Following the Presidential
decree “On Declaring 2016 the Year of English Language in Ukraine,” the Cabinet of
Ministers of Ukraine (led by the Ministry of Education and Science) are making a major
effort to intensify the study of English language in Ukraine and develop English language
fluency/proficiency within the government and throughout the country. This program will
focus on curriculum development and will likely include representatives of the educational
leadership involved in the “hub” schools project discussed above, as well as other
educational leaders.
Improved Civic Education – Secondary Schools (Two Programs)
Rationale: Ukraine has offered its students classes in civic education for more than a
decade now, but it remains an optional subject and its status as an academic subject is
questioned. More and more the importance of civic-mindedness and awareness of
societal/civic trends is being noted, especially as Ukraine moves toward integration with the
Western community of nations. Through this program, Ukrainian education officials and
other stakeholders in the Ukrainian educational system will discuss and develop appropriate
civic education curriculum and material to improve the level of competency in this subject
throughout Ukraine. This program will focus on curriculum development and involving the
community in civic education, and will likely include representatives of the educational
leadership involved in the “hub” schools project discussed above.
Parliamentary Programs
In addition to the above thematic programs, Open World is also soliciting expressions of
interest/capability statements for delegations of parliamentarians (possibly parliamentarians
and staffers in one delegation) from countries abroad. Through this program, Open World is
seeking to match delegations from these countries with key counterparts in the U.S. Senate,
the House of Representatives, and in state governments. These delegations may be defined
by the committees the members serve on or by subject area. Currently, these delegations
are not yet defined for specifics, such as date of travel, number of members, and duration of
program.
The proposed illustrative programming should identify a Member of Congress who would
be responsible for some aspect of the delegation’s program (preferably in Washington, D.C.
and in the Member’s state or district). It should also include proposed high-level meetings
in Washington, D.C. with other Members of Congress, executive branch officials,
09/16/2016 32
congressional staff and policy experts, and in-depth discussions with a variety of political,
civic, and business leaders in the relevant state/district.
09/16/2016 33
2017 Open World Program – Proposed Travel Dates9/10
9 This table only refers to the 97 delegations referred to in this solicitation, and not judicial rule of law
delegations and the potential additional Parliamentary delegations, the dates and make up of which are not
determined at this time. 10
Please note that a number of the delegations listed above might consist entirely of young professionals ages
30 and under. As of the publication date of these guidelines, it has not been determined how many, when, or
under which themes such delegations will travel, unless noted.
U.S. Arrival Date
Theme/Subtheme Country Number of Delegations
Young Professionals
01-Feb Role of Legislature/Staff
Role of Local Legislatures/Staff Georgia 1
Role of Local Legislatures/Staff Kazakhstan 1
8-Feb Role of Legislature/Staff
Improving Elections Processes/Elections Management
Kosovo 1
Legislative Development: Education Ukraine 1
Legislative Development: Health Care
Ukraine 1
Legislative Development: Women Legislators
Ukraine 1
Legislative Development: Women Staffers
Ukraine 1
2-Mar Women’s Issues
Women Leaders in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Math)
Azerbaijan 1
Encouraging Women’s STEM Education and Careers
Kyrgyzstan 1
Best Practices in Adoption Kyrgyzstan 1
Social Entrepreneurship for Women Russia 1
Women Leaders in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Math)
Russia 1
Women in Politics Russia 1
Role of Women in Countering Violent Extremism
Tajikistan 1
09/16/2016 34
Women Entrepreneurs Turkmenistan 1 X
15-Mar NGOs/Social issues
Combatting Human Trafficking – Sex Trafficking and Forced Labor
Ukraine 2
NGOs Combatting Poverty/Homelessness/Supporting Needy Children
Ukraine 2
LGBT Issues in Society Ukraine 2
Issues of Internally Displaced Persons/Crimean Tatars
Ukraine 2
22-Mar Sister Cities/Partnerships - Entrepreneurship
OPORA Sister Cities/Partnerships - Entrepreneurship
Russia 5
29-Mar Education and Innovation
Public Inclusion in the Policy Making Process (Think Tanks)
Kosovo 1
Academic Integrity – Secondary and Higher Education
Ukraine 2
Role of Innovators/Entrepreneurs in Society
Ukraine 1
Women Technology Entrepreneurs Ukraine 1
6-Apr Innovation
Young Entrepreneurs Kyrgyzstan 1 X
Livable City Planning Russia 1
Think Tanks Russia 1
Higher Education System in the U.S. Serbia 1
Innovation, Technology, and Start-ups
Tajikistan 1 X
26-April NGOs/Civil Society
Empowering NGOs/Advocacy Ukraine 2 X (1)
Empowering NGOs/E-Governance Ukraine 1
Empowering NGOs/Children with Disabilities
Ukraine 1
Empowering NGOs/Family Services Ukraine 2
NGOs and the Promotion of Civil Society/Youth Development and Workers
Ukraine 2 X (1)
11-May Health Issues
Mental Health and Well-being Tajikistan 1
E-Governance for Hospitals Turkmenistan 1
PTSD and Reintegration/Medical Practitioners and Social Workers
Ukraine 2
09/16/2016 35
18-May Environment/Agriculture
National Parks/Parks and Recreation
Kazakhstan 1
Prevention of Illegal Logging/DNA Analysis
Russia 1
Organic Certification Russia 1
Forest Management Russia 1
National Parks/Nature Reserve Russia 1
Legacy Waste Remediation Russia 1
Food Security/Food Safety Serbia 1
Ecotourism Tajikistan 1
1-Jun Environment
Environmental Campaigns/Public-Private Partnerships
Azerbaijan 1
Environmental Protection/Sustainable Development
Georgia 1
Sustainable Tourism Georgia 1
Environmental Protection Ukraine 2
6-Sep Media
Best Media Practices/Independent Media
Georgia 1
Multilingualism and Access to Public Information
Kosovo 1
Countering False Information/Media Literacy
Ukraine 3 X (1)
13-Sep Media
Best Media Practices OR Government Spokespeople
Kazakhstan 1
Best Media Practices Russia 1
Successful Blogging Russia 1 X
Building E-Government Capacity Serbia 1
Journalism Turkmenistan 1
21-Sep Civic Rule of Law
Combatting Domestic Violence Azerbaijan 1
Supporting Judicial Ethics and Discipline
Kosovo 1
Domestic/Gender-Based Violence – Victim Rights and Prosecution of Perpetrators
Kyrgyzstan 1
Combatting Domestic Violence Tajikistan 1
Combatting Domestic Violence Ukraine 1
09/16/2016 36
Grantee Programming and Administrative Requirements
Successful grantee organizations will be responsible for eight days and eight nights of
programming (including weekends) for delegations (most consisting of five delegates and
one facilitator) arriving in the United States between Feb. 1 and Oct. 25, 2017.
Delegations will land in the United States on a Wednesday or Thursday and arrive in their
host communities on a Friday or Saturday.11
Grantee organizations will be expected to
successfully complete and/or oversee the following programmatic and administrative
activities:
11
The Center will consider proposals that contain different provisions (for the length of stay, size of
delegations, arrival day, etc.) than those outlined here, if needed to deliver quality programming.
Combatting Human Trafficking Ukraine 1
Anti-Corruption Practices/E-governance and Transparency
Ukraine 1
27-Sep Education
Promoting Media Literacy in Schools
Armenia 1
School-Based Drug Prevention Programs
Kazakhstan 1
Environmental Education Kazakhstan 1
Inclusive Education Russia 1
Autism Spectrum Disorder Russia 1
Social Integration of Children and Adults with Mental Disabilities
Russia 1
11-Oct Education
Policies and Planning: Improved Higher Education
Kosovo 1
Improved English Language Education – Secondary Schools
Ukraine 2
Improved Civic Education – Secondary Schools
Ukraine 2
25-Oct Civil Rights
Accountability and Ethics in Government: E-Freedom of Information
Armenia 1
Making Cities Accessible for Handicapped Individuals
Russia 1
Indigenous Groups Russia 1
Muslim Inter-Ethnic Issues Russia 1
Finno-Ugric indigenous Peoples Russia 1
U.S. Political Party System (Young Party Leaders)
Serbia 1 X
09/16/2016 37
Recruit and select local host organizations and families. The local host
organizations must demonstrate expertise in, and programming resources for, the
Hosting Theme(s) and subthemes selected by the grant applicant. Programs should
emphasize mutual learning and dialogue. Grantees are encouraged to recruit host
coordinators, presenters, and home hosts who are interested in maintaining contact
with the Open World delegates after their U.S. visit through joint projects, ad hoc
and/or formal organization-to-organization ties, and regular communications.
Submit a Host Organization Profile Form for each local program to be hosted by a
local host organization approved by the Center. The grantee organization must
submit the form(s) to the Center within two weeks of being notified of a host
organization’s approval. The form (supplied by the Center) asks for the local host
organization’s theme/subtheme preferences and preferred hosting dates, a general
description of the planned local program, and descriptions of three or four proposed
professional activities. This information, which will be shared with the Center’s
logistical contractor, will improve Open World’s ability to match delegates with
local host organizations quickly and appropriately.
If providing nominations: (1) ensure that nominating partners (both domestic and
international) submit only names of qualified and high-quality candidates and the
necessary background program and partnership/project information to the logistical
contractor by the designated deadlines, and (2) be responsible for reviewing
nominees’ applications prior to their submission to the logistical contractor to
ensure that nominees meet Open World criteria and that the information in the
applications is complete and accurate. Nominators identified by the grantee will
work closely with Center staff to select appropriate applicants.
Be responsible for effective implementation of each program developed by local
host organizations.
Participate, either in person or via telephone conference, in coordination meetings
with representatives of the Center and/or representatives of the Center’s logistical
contractor.
Attend the 2017 Open World grantee orientation meeting, which is expected to be
held in January 2017 in Washington, DC. (The cost for one representative to attend
the meeting is to be included in the proposed budget; see p. 47 for details.)
Help make arrangements for Center staff to conduct site visits during local hosting
programs, if requested by the Center.
Submit required reports by scheduled deadlines, including the host coordinator post-
program report for each visit, the final program report, federal financial reports, and
cost-share reports.
09/16/2016 38
Assist the Center in coordinating press outreach, if requested, with local host
organizations.
Report on visit outcomes as required (see Results section below).
Ensure that local host coordinators are aware of Open World’s website and social-
networking resources; have local host coordinators encourage presenters and host
families to find the Open World Leadership Center on Facebook at
www.facebook.com/openworldleadershipcenter2; and encourage local host
coordinators, presenters, and host families to get up-to-the-minute information on
Open World by following http://twitter.com/owprogram.
Adhere to federal income tax regulations.
Grantees are responsible for ensuring that they or the local host organizations will:
Coordinate with the Center on congressional outreach in the local communities and
Washington, DC, and ensure, when possible, that delegates have the opportunity to
meet with Members of Congress or their local staff, and send any photos from such
meetings to the Center as soon as possible.
Ensure that delegates have voluntary opportunities to share their professional
expertise and their knowledge about their native country in meetings with their
American counterparts and in public settings such as conferences, colloquia,
classroom and civic-association presentations, town meetings, and media
interviews.
Provide local transportation during participants’ visits, beginning with pickup at the
U.S. final destination airport and ending with delivery to the departure airport.
Participants may not take public transportation to a professional activity
unless the grantee gets advance approval from the Center, and a local escort
must accompany the participants.
Provide a suitable homestay placement for each delegate, usually for eight days,
including weekends. Homestays are a centerpiece of the Open World
experience and a major factor in grant application evaluations.
Each participant and interpreter must be given his or her own private
bedroom. If this cannot be arranged, the grantee must get advance approval from
the Center for delegates to share a bedroom. The facilitator and interpreter may not
share a bedroom with a delegate under any circumstances.
Ensure that breakfast, lunch, and dinner are provided daily to the delegates and
facilitator(s) during their stay. Unlike similar U.S. government programs, Open
World does not provide per diems to its participants.
09/16/2016 39
Note that interpretation services are no longer required in the grant submission; the
Center uses the services of a contractor.
Prepare an eight-day program for each participant group that reflects the selected
Hosting Theme and includes other activities that meet program objectives.
Approximately 32 hours of programming should directly address the Hosting
Theme. Time spent in professional sessions with federal, state, county, or local
legislators and legislative staff counts toward this total. Cross-cultural activities
should be scheduled for weekends and some evenings. A cross-cultural activity is
an activity designed to promote exposure and interchange between the delegates and
Americans in order to increase their understanding of each other’s society, culture,
and institutions. Cross-cultural activities include cultural, social, and sports
activities.
Provide an end-of-visit review session for the delegates, facilitator(s), and host
coordinator to review program successes/weaknesses and to identify any new
projects, or any joint projects, reciprocal visits, or other continued professional
interactions between delegates and their new American contacts, that will likely
result from the Open World program.
Coordinate with the Center on press outreach, including sharing drafts of any press
material developed for each delegation in advance, if requested, and reviewing any
relevant press material developed by the Center, if requested. The Center strongly
encourages local host organizations to try to get press coverage of Open World
visits. Local press releases on Open World exchanges must credit the Open
World Leadership Center and the U.S. Congress.
Track results efficiently and regularly report them. Definitions of results, and
requirements and methods for reporting them, are given in the Document-Exchange
Deadlines table on the next page and in the Results section that immediately follows
it.
Grantee Interaction with Open World Contractors
The Center contracts with a logistical support organization that will provide administrative
and logistical support for the Open World program, including assistance with (a) planning
and administration of the nominations process in the countries included in this solicitation;
(b) visas and travel arrangements; (c) selection and training of facilitators; (d) formation of
delegations; (e) organization of pre-departure orientations; and (f) review of program
agendas (which supplements the Center’s own review of the agendas). Grantees and their
local hosts will be required to work closely with this contractor through all steps of the
planning process and meet the relevant deadlines in the following table. As noted earlier,
the Center will serve as the logistical contractor for the delegations from Armenia,
Azerbaijan, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kosovo, Mongolia, Serbia, Tajikistan, and Turkmenistan,
and possibly for a limited number of delegations from one or more of the other countries
covered by this solicitation.
09/16/2016 40
As noted previously, the Center contracts with an interpretation service provider that will
recruit and contract with all interpreters needed for Open World programs. Grantees and
their local hosts will be required to work closely with this contractor to ensure that the
interpreters are placed in appropriate lodging and receive all program documents and
information prior to the delegation’s arrival in the hosting community.
Document-Exchange Deadlines for an Open World Visit
The table below lists the major deadlines for information and document exchange between
local host coordinators/grantees and Open World’s logistical contactor, measured backward
from the delegation’s U.S. arrival date (two to three days before the host-community arrival
date). For the few delegations for which the Center serves as the logistical contractor, the
information and document exchange will take place between the local host coordinator (or
grantee) and the Center.
Deadline Host Coordinator provides: Logistical contractor
provides:
8-6 weeks
before arrival Participant Names and
Profiles
4 weeks before
arrival Draft Program Agenda
Community Profile (if requested)
Flight Itineraries
2 weeks before
arrival Updated Program Agenda (with
changes highlighted)
Host Family Forms (including
contact info. and brief bios)
Emergency Contact Information
(if different from that on the
Updated Program Agenda)
3 weeks after
departure Post-program Report (Host
Narrative, Post-program Program
Agenda, Final Host Family Forms,
Media Coverage, Photos)*
Delegation Feedback on
Program to Grantee and
Local Host Coordinator
*The required forms will be sent to grantees by Center staff. The Host Narrative Form asks for information
on professional activities, including meetings with Members of Congress and congressional staff; brief
descriptions of actual and potential trip results; and host-coordinator comments and recommendations. The
agenda submitted as part of the Post-program Report is to show the actual activities conducted. Open World’s
handbook for local host coordinators now ask hosts to make press articles and photos from their exchanges
available to the Center as soon as possible, rather than waiting to include them with the Post-program Report.
Grantees are also requested to make available to the Center as soon as possible any photos they receive
from their local host organizations.
09/16/2016 41
Results
The Center tracks the results of the Open World program using eight categories, or “bins.”
Below are definitions and examples of these categories, along with explanations of which
results categories grantee and local host organizations must report on and which categories
they are encouraged to report on.
RESULT DESCRIPTION EXAMPLES GRANTEE/SUBGRANTE
E REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
Benefits to Americans
Open World promotes mutual understanding and benefit. Hosts, presenters, and others can gain new information from delegates.
Estimate of audience size for delegate presentations.
Publicity for host organization.
The Final Program Report (submitted by the Grantee) and the Host Narrative must report any benefits to Americans that resulted from the exchange.
Partnerships
An American organization involved in a visit partners with an organization from the delegates’ country on a joint project or starts an affiliate in that country.
University-to-university e-learning partnerships.
Sister-court relationships.
Community-to-community interactions between governmental entities.
The Host Narrative is to report on any partnerships that might result from the exchange. The Final Program Report must report on actual post-visit partnership activities.
Projects
A delegate implements an idea inspired by the Open World experience.
Opening city council meetings to the public.
The Host Narrative is to report on any delegate projects that might result from the visit. The Final Program Report must report on any actual projects that the grantee learns about.
Multipliers
A delegate shares his/her new knowledge back home, thereby “multiplying” the Open World experience.
After returning home, a delegate gives talks on knowledge gained during the visit.
The Host Narrative is to report on any potential multipliers mentioned by delegates. The Final Program Report must report on any actual multipliers that the grantee learns about.
Reciprocal Visits
Americans involved in the exchange meet with alumni in-country or work in-country on an Open World–inspired project.
The Host Narrative is to report on any reciprocal visits that might result from the exchange. The Final Program Report must report on reciprocal visits by grantees or subgrantees.
09/16/2016 42
Press
A delegation’s visit is covered by local media.
The Host is to send press on the visit to the Center and the logistical contractor. Grantees are encouraged to include later articles in the Final Program Report.
Contribu-tions
In-kind (in hours or material goods) or cash donations.
Volunteer hours to plan and conduct hosting.
Private donations to Open World events.
Grantees must submit the Open World Cost-Share Report Form. The Host must report to the Grantee on contributions.
Professional Advance-
ment
Alumni are promoted or experience other career enhancements after their Open World visit.
An alumnus wins a grant to fund an NGO project.
An alumna is elected to office.
The Final Program Report must report any professional advancement that the grantee learns about. (A Host learning of post-visit advancement is encouraged to report it to the Center.)
09/16/2016 43
Key Dates and Deadlines12
For all countries covered by this solicitation, grant applications are due on Monday,
October 17, 2016.
A final program report on the overall administration of Open World grant and hosting
activities, including recommendations for future program changes and a description of
outcomes achieved (as defined in the Results section above), must be submitted by the
grantee organization within 90 days of its final hosting activity under the grant.
All 2017 grants will end on March 30, 2018, when final financial reports are due to the
Center, unless a later date is agreed to in writing by the Center. Please note again that
grantees are encouraged to submit all final financial documentation by ninety (90) days
after the completion of programming activities.
Criteria for Evaluating Grant Applications
All grant applications for the Open World program under these guidelines will be evaluated
on the following factors, listed in order of importance:
1. Degree to which proposed program plans address Open World’s programming
priorities and objectives, especially with regard to (a) giving delegates significant
exposure to federal, state, county, and local legislators, the structure and functions
of legislatures, and the legislative process; (b) the likelihood of producing new
partnerships or furthering existing ones; (c) the potential for follow-on project
activities and/or significant projected results, such as plans for future reverse travel;
(d) collaborative programming with American young professionals organizations;
and (e) including a significant cost share.
2. Past experience in hosting similar programs, especially for citizens of the specific
country(ies) for which you are applying.
3. Demonstrated ability or experience in creating programs in the Hosting Theme(s)
proposed in the application.
4. Demonstrated ability to recruit or plan for recruiting host coordinators, presenters,
and home hosts who are interested in maintaining contact with the delegates after
their U.S. visit.
5. Quality of submitted sample agendas (one important factor in determining quality is
whether the agendas include opportunities for delegates to make presentations to
professional and public audiences and to have open dialogue with their hosts and
professional counterparts).
6. Ability to home host.
7. Per person costs. (Please note that the “per person cost” does not stand alone as a
criterion. The Center also looks at the ratio of administrative costs to program costs,
as well as the cost share amount the organization is proposing.)
8. Ability to host on theme dates.
12
See table on p. 40 for deadlines for document delivery to the logistical contractor.
09/16/2016 44
9. Quality of submitted work plans, including plans for the implementation of the U.S.
programs, results tracking and reporting, and the nomination strategy (if applicable).
10. For previous Open World grantees: assessments of previous hosting quality and
results. Assessments are based on input from Open World program managers,
facilitator reports, and informal delegate surveys, and on the quality and promptness
of grantee programmatic/administrative and financial reporting, including the
accuracy of financial records.
11. For proposals that contain plans for nominations, the Center will weigh the degree
to which the proposed programs advance Open World’s programming priorities
indicated above in the first criterion.
GRANT PROPOSAL OUTLINE
Proposals and budgets should be e-mailed to the Grants Officer: Lewis Madanick, Program
Manager, Open World Leadership Center, at lmad@openworld.gov. Please put “2017 Open
World Grant Proposal” in the subject line. Please contact Mr. Madanick at (202) 707-8943
or lmad@openworld.gov if you have questions regarding this solicitation.
The Open World Leadership Center grants committee will review applications and respond
no later than 35 calendar days after receipt of an application.
ACTUAL DETERMINATIONS OF PARTICIPANT HOSTING LEVELS AND THE
DATE OF AWARDS WILL DEPEND ON AVAILABLE FUNDING.
All submissions must provide the following cover sheet:
NAME OF ORGANIZATION
MAILING ADDRESS
PROGRAM CONTACT – NAME, EMAIL ADDRESS, AND PHONE NUMBER
FINANCIAL/BUDGET CONTACT – NAME, EMAIL ADDRESS, AND PHONE
NUMBER
09/16/2016 45
All submissions must follow the outline below.13
1. Project Summary – A narrative document of no more than eight double-spaced
pages providing the following information:
Estimates of your hosting capabilities, i.e., number of host communities and number
of participants (delegates and facilitators) to be hosted.
General description of your programming capabilities for the countries for which
you are applying.
Descriptions of how your organization will fulfill the program objectives,
programming priorities, and the requirements given above, including how results
will be accomplished and reported, and how delegates will be introduced to
legislators (including Members of Congress), legislative staff, and legislative
entities, processes, and functions.
Examples of how your organization’s hosting activities and past experience will be
applied to recruiting host coordinators, presenters, and host families potentially
interested in maintaining contact or developing joint projects with delegates.
2. Proposed Countries and Hosting Themes – For each country that you propose to
host for, please submit the following:
Detailed description of your capabilities to host in the proposed theme(s) and
subtheme(s).
Proposed schedule of selected hosting dates (with proposed hosting sites) by
country.
Sample/illustrative activities or sample agendas.
Organizations/persons participating.
Objective of illustrative activity: i.e., lessons to be learned.
Special resources required.
3. Summary of your organization’s past experience with similar programs
4. Statements of any unique qualifications for this program
5. Work Plan – The work plan is a chronological outline that demonstrates your
ability to administer the grant and meet all required deadlines, including those for
reporting on results and cost sharing.
6. Budget Submission – The budget submission is the financial expression of your
organization’s proposal to become an implementing partner in the Open World
program. Therefore, your budget submission needs to reflect your administration of
a program that meets the objectives and theme rationales outlined above.
13
Pages 46–74 contain more information on financial management and budget requirements, including a
recommended budget form (p. 47).
09/16/2016 46
FINANCIAL PROCEDURES – 2017 GRANTS
PLEASE READ CAREFULLY
I. Grant Proposals
Every grant proposal must be accompanied by a project budget (per instructions below) as
well as the prospective grantee’s latest audit opinion. The audit opinion usually is a cover
letter that accompanies the full audit report.
a. Budget Submission
Budget categories should contain a narrative description detailing what the funds for this
category will cover, and how those estimates were calculated (for example, salary costs
should delineate the position, the hourly rate, the number of hours calculated, etc.).
Each budget category should include an accounting of any cost-share contribution the
organization is providing. Cost-share contributions are an important factor in
the grant selection process. Organizations are encouraged to carefully consider their
ability to share in the cost of the program and to offer the maximum contributions feasible.
All organizations awarded grants by the Center will be required to submit cost-share report
forms by March 30, 2018.
Below are some possible categories for your budget submission. Each category in your
budget proposal must provide dollar amounts accompanied by a narrative justification.
When an individual category will be under $500, you might want to combine one or more
like categories. NOTE: When preparing your budget, please keep in mind that an
overage of 10 percent or more in any one category will require prior written approval
from the Open World Leadership Center’s deputy executive director and budget
officer, Jane Sargus.14
1. Personnel Compensation – Salaries and wages paid directly to your employees.
2. Personnel Benefits – Costs associated with employee benefits.
3. Administrative Travel – Costs associated with having one representative attend the
grantee orientation meeting for one night and day, including economy/coach travel
to and from Washington, DC; transportation within Washington, DC; and a one-
night hotel stay at a designated local hotel. (Dinner, breakfast, and lunch will be
covered by the Center.)
4. Local Travel and Transportation – Local travel and transportation of staff and/or
local transportation for delegates.
5. Office Expenses – Postage, telephone, supplies, etc.
6. Cultural Activities & Refreshments – Receptions, admissions to events, meals, etc.
7. Sub-grants – Grants made to others by your organization.
14
Under no circumstances does obtaining the Center’s written approval for an overage in a given category
permit a grantee to exceed the total amount that it was awarded by the Center.
09/16/2016 47
Budget submissions reflecting any General and Administrative Overhead Costs must have
such costs shown as separate line items and supported by narrative justifications.
Sample Budget Submission:
Proposed Budget for Submission
Under the 2017 Open World Program
Proposed Number of Participants:
Cost Per Participant:
Budget Category15
Amount Cost Share Narrative Justification Personnel Compensation $XX,XXX $XX,XXX Director and Specialist will work for 2
months as follows:
Director: XXX hours @
$XX/hour=$X,XXX
Specialist: XXX hours @
$XX/hour=$X,XXX
Personnel Benefits $X,XXX $X,XXX Benefits calculated @ XX% of salary
Administrative Travel $XXX $XXX Transportation to, from, and within
Washington, DC; one-night hotel stay
Local Travel and Transportation
(domestic)
$X,XXX $X,XXX Local transportation for staff and rental of
transport for delegation (one van @ $XXX
per day for X days); $XXX taxi and public
transportation16
Office Expenses $XXX $XXX Utilities, supplies, printing, etc.
Utilities=$X,XXX
Supplies, phone, printing=$XXX
Cultural Activities & Refreshments $XXX $XXX Receptions, admissions, etc. For meals,
please use the number of delegates X 5
lunches X local per diem lunch rate +
number of delegates X 2 dinners X local
per diem dinner rate
Sub-Grants $XX,XXX $XXX E.g., three local organizations will each
receive a grant for $X,XXX=$XX,XXX to
cover hosting expenses17
Total $XX,XXX $XX,XXX
PROPOSED BY:
Signature Program Officer and Date:
15
Please note that the Center does not fund equipment purchases. 16
Participants (delegates and their facilitator[s]) may not take public transportation to a professional activity
unless the grantee gets advance approval from the Center, and a local escort must accompany the participants. 17
Sub-Grants to third-party organizations require a separate attached budget.
09/16/2016 48
b. Allowable Costs
The reasonableness, allowability, and allocation of costs for work performed under a Center
grant shall be determined in accordance with the applicable federal cost principles and the
terms and conditions of the grant award.
1. Pre-Award Costs. Applicant organizations may include project costs incurred
within the 90-calendar-day period immediately preceding the beginning date of the
grant in the proposed budget. Pre-award expenditures are made at the risk of the
applicant organization, and the Center is not obligated to cover such costs in the
event an award is not made or is made for an amount that is less than the applicant
organization anticipated.
2. Travel Costs. Travel costs are the expenses for transportation, lodging,
subsistence, and related items incurred by those who are on official business
attributable to work under a grant. Such costs may be charged on an actual basis, on
a per diem or mileage basis in lieu of actual costs, or on a combination of the two,
provided the method used results in charges consistent with those normally allowed
by the grantee in its regular operation, as set forth in the grantee’s written travel
policy. Airfare costs in excess of the lowest available commercial discount or
customary standard (coach) airfare are unallowable unless such accommodations are
not reasonably available to accomplish the purpose of travel. All air travel that is
paid in whole or in part with Center funds must be undertaken on U.S. air carriers
unless the Center gives prior written approval for use of non-U.S. carriers.
II. Grant Documentation and Compliance
a. Introduction
Through its grants, the government sponsors everything from complex multimillion dollar,
multiyear scientific research and development undertakings to the creative efforts of
individual young artists. As might be expected, the rules that have been developed to
address all the situations likely to arise between the government and its grantees are
extensive. Working from a comprehensive set of grant principles published by the Office
of Management and Budget (OMB), the Open World Leadership Center (the Center) has
identified specific rules that will apply to all grantees and subrecipients of Center grants.
These rules are explained below. It is important to become familiar with these provisions
and comply with them.
Please note that the Open World Leadership Center, as a legislative branch agency, is not
required to apply the OMB grants-related guidance for executive branch agencies and
departments found in the OMB Circulars and in Title 2 of the Code of Federal Regulations
(CFR). Nevertheless, it is the policy of the Center to follow this familiar grants guidance
and to deviate from it only when in the best interest of the Open World program.
Consequently, CFR Title 2 and relevant OMB Circulars will apply as they are customarily
implemented by the Center in connection with the Open World program. For example, the
09/16/2016 49
requirement in 2 CFR 215.4 “Deviations” for clearance through OMB of any deviations to
the terms of the circulars will not apply to Open World. Instead, grantees should direct any
questions about the Center’s implementation of the OMB Circulars to Jane Sargus, Deputy
Executive Director/Budget Officer, at jsar@openworld.gov.
Unless otherwise specified herein, sections from the CFR and OMB Circulars listed below,
as implemented by the Center, will be incorporated by reference into Center grant awards.
These authorities will be administered in accordance with standard federal requirements for
grant agreements, as interpreted by the Center:
o 2 CFR Part 215, “Uniform Administrative Requirements for Institutions of
Higher Education, Hospitals, and Other Non-Profit Organizations” (OMB
Circular A-110)
o 2 CFR Part 220, “Cost Principles for Educational Institutions”(OMB
Circular A-21)
o 2 CFR Part 225, “Cost Principles for State, Local, and Indian Tribal
Governments” (OMB Circular A-87)
o 2 CFR Part 230, “Cost Principles for Non-Profit Organizations” (OMB
Circular A-122)
o OMB Circular A-102, “Grants and Cooperative Agreements with State and
Local Governments”
o OMB Circular A-133, “Audits of States, Local Governments, and Non-Profit
Organizations”
The full text of these authorities is available as follows:
Code of Federal Regulations, Title 2, “Grants and Agreements” is available online
from the National Archives and Records Administration via the Government Printing
Office GPOAccess website at: www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/cfr-table-
search.html#page1
The OMB Circulars are available online from the OMB website at:
www.whitehouse.gov/omb/circulars/index.html
Copies of relevant authorities are also available from the Center upon request
09/16/2016 50
b. Basic Grantee Responsibilities
The grantee holds full responsibility for the conduct of project activities under a Center
award, for adherence to the award conditions, and for informing the Center during the
course of the grant of any significant programmatic, administrative, or financial problems
that arise. In accepting a grant, the grantee assumes the legal responsibility of
administering the grant in accordance with these requirements and of maintaining
documentation, which is subject to audit, of all actions and expenditures affecting the grant.
Failure to comply with the requirements of the award could result in suspension or
termination of the grant and the Center’s recovery of grant funds. The grantee also assumes
full legal responsibility for any contracts entered into relating to the grant program.
c. Compliance with Federal Law
Applicant organizations must certify that their programs operate in compliance with the
requirements of various federal statutes and their implementing regulations. These are
described below. Grantees are also required to obtain an executed certification of
compliance with these statutes from all organizations that are subrecipients under a Center
grant.
1. Nondiscrimination. Grants are subject to the provisions of Title VI of the Civil
Rights Act of 1964, Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 (as amended),
Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (as amended), the Age Discrimination
Act of 1975 (as amended), and the regulations issued pursuant thereto. Therefore,
no person on grounds of race, color, national origin, disability, or age shall be
excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be otherwise subject to
discrimination under a program funded by the Center. In addition, if a project
involves an educational activity or program, as defined in Title IX of the Education
Amendments of 1972, no person on the basis of sex shall be excluded from
participation in the project.
2. Lobbying Activities. The Byrd Anti-Lobbying Amendment, 31 U.S.C. 1352,
prohibits recipients of federal contracts, grants, and loans from using appropriated
funds to influence the executive or legislative branches of the federal government in
connection with a specific contract, grant, cooperative agreement, loan, or any other
award covered by § 1352. 18 U.S.C. 1913 makes it a crime to use funds
appropriated by Congress to influence members of Congress regarding
congressional legislation or appropriations. Finally, Attachment B25 of Office of
Management and Budget Circular A-122 designates the following as unallowable
charges to grant funds or cost sharing: certain electioneering activities, financial
support for political parties, attempts to influence federal or state legislation either
directly or through grass-roots lobbying, and some legislative liaison activities.
3. Drug-Free Workplace. The Drug-Free Workplace Act of 1988, 41 U.S.C. 701,
requires grantees to have an on-going drug-free awareness program; to publish a
statement notifying employees that the unlawful manufacture, distribution,
09/16/2016 51
dispensing, possession, or use of a controlled substance is prohibited in the
workplace; to maintain evidence that this statement was given to each employee
engaged in the performance of the grant; and to identify in the funding proposal or
to keep on file in its office the place(s) where grant activities will be carried out.
4. Debarment and Suspension. Applicant-organization principals must not be
presently debarred or suspended or otherwise excluded from or ineligible to
participate in federal assistance programs. An applicant or grantee organization
shall provide immediate written notice to the Center Grants Officer if at any time it
learns that its certification was erroneous when submitted or has become erroneous
by reason of changed circumstances. Grantees shall not make or permit any
subgrant or contract to any party which is debarred or suspended or is otherwise
excluded from or ineligible for participation in federal assistance programs.
Grantees and subgrantees must not make any award or permit any award (subgrant
or contract) at any tier to any party which is debarred or suspended or is otherwise
excluded from or ineligible for participation in Federal assistance programs under
Executive Order 12549, “Debarment and Suspension.”
Grantee organizations must complete two forms annually in reference to the above:
Disclosure of Lobbying Activities (Form LLL) and Assurances – Non-Construction
Programs (Form 424B). Both forms will be provided by the Open World Leadership
Center.
III. Grant Period and Extensions
Grant Period - The grant period is the span of time during which the grantee has the
authority to obligate grant funds and undertake project activities. However, when approved
by the Center, a grantee may incur necessary project costs in the 90-day period prior to the
beginning date of the grant period. All 2017 grants will begin on the date of the
grantee’s signature on the award letter and end no later than March 30, 2018.
Final Program Report - A final program report on the overall administration of Open
World grant and hosting activities, including recommendations for future program changes
and a description of outcomes achieved, must be submitted by the grantee organization
within 90 days of its final hosting activity under the grant.
Financial Reports - Final financial reports are due for the period ending March 30, 2018
to the Center no later than April 10, 2018, unless a later date is agreed to in writing by the
Center. Please note that grantees are encouraged to submit all final financial documentation
with the final program report by ninety (90) days after the completion of programming
activities. See Section IV for detailed information on quarterly financial reporting.
Extension of Grant - The Center may authorize a one-time extension of the expiration date
established in the initial grant award if additional time is required to complete the original
scope of the project with the funds already made available. A single extension that shall
not exceed 2 months may be made for this purpose, provided it is made prior to the original
09/16/2016 52
expiration date. Grant periods will not be extended merely for using the unliquidated
balance of project funds.
IV. Reporting Requirements
Each organization awarded a grant by the Center is required to submit by fax or e-mail the
following reports. Please include the Open World Grant Number (e.g., OWLC-1352)
in the fax’s or e-mail’s subject line each time a report is submitted. Failure to meet
these deadlines will negatively affect consideration for future grants from
the Center.
a. Federal Financial Reports (Standard Form 425)
A Federal Financial Report (Standard Form 425) is required for each grant awarded and
still open. The quarterly reporting periods are:
1. Beginning of grant award–March 31, 2017 (Due 4/10/17)
2. April 1–June 30, 2017 (Due 7/10/17)
3. July 1–September 30, 2017 (Due 9/30/17)
4. October 1–December 31, 2017 (Due 1/10/18)
5. January 1–March 31, 2018 (Due 4/10/2018)
When submitting Federal Financial Reports, please include the Open
World Grant Number in the fax’s or e-mail’s subject line.
b. Cost Share Report
A Cost Share Report (form provided by the Center) must be completed no later than March
30, 2018. The report must identify all cost-share contributions made toward the program
for which the grant was given. When submitting, please include the Open World Grant
Number in the fax’s or e-mail’s subject line.
c. Final Financial Reports
To close a grant the following must be submitted:
1. Final Federal Financial Report (Form 425)
2. Request for Advance or Reimbursement (Form 270), if appropriate, and marked
“Final” and
3. A Variance Report that compares actual expenditures by major budget categories
against the grant award budget categories. The variance report shall give the
following data: approved budget categories; amount approved for each category;
amount expended in each category; and the percent over/under the approved budget
amount in each category.
09/16/2016 53
NOTE: Please keep in mind that an overage of 10 percent or more
in any one category would have required prior written approval
from the Open World Leadership Center’s Budget Officer.
4. Cost Share Report (form provided by Open World).
Final Financial Reports for the period ending March 30, 2018 must be submitted to the
Center not later than April 10, 2018, unless a later date is agreed to in writing by the Center.
When submitting, please include the Open World Grant Number in the fax’s or e-mail’s
subject line.
V. Payments and Interest
Grantees may be paid on an advance basis, unless otherwise specified in the grant award,
and payment will be effected through electronic funds transfer. Whenever possible,
advances should be deposited and maintained in insured accounts. Grantees are also
encouraged to use women-owned and minority-owned banks (banks that are owned at least
50 percent by women or minority group members).
a. Payment Requests. Requests for advance payment shall be limited to no more than
50 percent of the funds remaining on the grant, with the expectation that the
advance will be used within a thirty day period from when it is requested, unless
otherwise specified by the Center. Grant funds that have been advanced but are
unspent at the end of the grant period must be returned to the Center. Grantees
must make every effort to avoid requesting advance payment of
funds that then are not used.
b. Interest on Grant Funds. All grantees, except states (see glossary), are required to
maintain advances of federal funds in interest-bearing accounts unless the grantee
receives less than $120,000 per year in advances of grant funds or the most
reasonably available interest-bearing account would not earn more than $250 per
year on the federal cash balance, or would entail bank services charges in excess of
the interest earned. Interest that is earned on advanced payments shall be remitted
to the Center.
c. Requesting Reimbursement or Advance. When requesting reimbursement or
advance of funds, the Request for Advance or Reimbursement of Funds (Form 270)
must be used. Grantees must clearly mark in their documentation for requesting
funds whether the request is for a partial advance payment, reimbursement, or the
final close-out payment of the grant. NOTE: If the request is for an advance of
funds, the “period covered” must state a time period subsequent to the request.
If the request is for a reimbursement of funds, the “period covered” must state
a time period prior to the request. It is also possible to request both a partial
reimbursement and an advance, and in this case the beginning date must be in
the past and the ending date in the future.
09/16/2016 54
VI. Budget Revisions
The project budget is the schedule of anticipated project expenditures that is approved by
the Center for carrying out the purposes of the grant. When grantees or third parties
support a portion of the project costs, the project budget includes the nonfederal as well as
the federal share of project expenses. All requests for budget revisions must be signed by
the recipient organization’s grant administrator and submitted to the Center.
Within 14 calendar days from the date of receipt of the request for budget revision, the
Center will review the request and notify the grantee whether or not the budget revision has
been approved. NOTE: Budget categories are firm, and any overage in expenditure in a
particular category of more than 10 percent must be approved by the Center in advance.
Under no circumstances does obtaining the Center’s written approval for an overage
in a given category permit a grantee to exceed the total amount that it was awarded by
the Center.
Grantees must obtain prior written approval from the Center whenever a budget revision is
necessary because of:
the transfer to a third party (by subgranting, contracting, or other means) of any
work under a grant (Center approval is not required for third-party transfers that
were described in the approved project plan, or for the purchase of supplies,
materials, or general support services);
the addition of costs that are specifically disallowed by the terms and conditions of
the grant award;
the transfer of funds from one budget category to another in excess of 10 percent of
each category; or
changes in the scope or objectives of the project.
VII. Organizational Prior Approval System
The recipient organization is required to have written procedures in place for reviewing and
approving in advance proposed administrative changes such as:
a. the expenditure of project funds for items that, under the applicable cost
principles, normally require prior agency approval;
b. the one-time extension of a grant period;
c. the incurring of project costs prior to the beginning date of an award; and
09/16/2016 55
d. budget revisions that involve the transfer of funds among budget
categories.
1. Purpose. The procedures for approving such changes are sometimes referred to as
an “organizational prior approval system.” The purpose of such a system is to
ensure that:
all grant actions and expenditures are consistent with the terms and
conditions of the award, as well as with the policies of the Center and the
recipient organization;
any changes that may be made do NOT constitute a change in the scope
of the project; and
any deviation from the budget approved by the Center is necessary and
reasonable for the accomplishment of project objectives and is allowable
under the applicable federal cost principles.
2. Requirements. Although grantees are free to design a prior approval system that
suits their particular needs and circumstances, an acceptable system must at a
minimum include the following:
the procedure for review of proposed changes must be in writing;
proposed changes must be reviewed at a level beyond the project
director;
whenever changes are approved, the grantee institution has to retain
documentation of the approval for three years following the submission
of the final financial report.
VIII. Cost Sharing and Cost-Sharing Records
While the Center tries to fund as many of the project activities as is fiscally possible, a
grantee is expected to share in project expenses as much as possible and at the level
indicated in its approved project budget. Grantees must maintain auditable records of all
project costs whether they are charged to grant funds or supported by cost-sharing
contributions. All cash and in-kind contributions to a project that are provided by a grantee
or a third party are acceptable as cost sharing when such contributions meet the following
criteria:
Are verifiable from the grantee’s records;
Are not included as contributions for any other federally assisted program;
Are necessary and reasonable for the proper and efficient accomplishment of project
objectives;
09/16/2016 56
Are types of charges that would be allowable under the applicable cost principles;
Are used to support activities that are included in the approved project work plan;
Are incurred during the grant period.
Contributions such as property, space, or services that a grantee donates to a project are to
be valued in accordance with the applicable federal cost principles and not on the basis of
what would normally be charged for the use of these items or services. When cost sharing
includes third-party in-kind contributions, the basis for determining the valuation of
volunteer services and donated property or space must be documented and must conform to
federal principles. Appendix 3 illustrates the cost-share report form [with instructions] that
the Center will provide to grantees and local hosts to aid them in estimating cost-share
totals. The form/s are due to the Center by March 31, 2018.
IX. Suspension and Termination
a. Grants may be terminated in whole or in part:
by the Center if the grantee materially fails to comply with the terms and
conditions of an award;
by the Center with the grantee’s consent, in which case the two parties
shall agree upon the termination conditions, including the effective date
and, in the case of partial termination, the portion of the project to be
terminated; or
by the grantee, upon sending to the Center via fax or e-mail written
notification—followed by signed documents sent via overnight or
express delivery PER ARRANGEMENTS MADE BY CONTACTING
OPEN WORLD DEPUTY EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR JANE SARGUS
AT (202) 707-8943—setting forth the reasons for such termination, the
effective date, and, in the case of partial termination, the portion of the
project to be terminated. However, if the Center determines that the
reduced or modified portion of the grant will not accomplish the
purposes for which the grant was made, it may terminate the grant in its
entirety either unilaterally or with the grantee’s consent.
b. Suspension or Termination for Cause. When the Center determines that a
grantee has failed to comply with the terms of the grant award, the Center may
suspend or terminate the grant for cause. Normally, this action will be taken
only after the grantee has been notified of the deficiency and given sufficient
time to correct it, but this does not preclude immediate suspension or
termination when such action is required to protect the interests of the Center.
In the event that a grant is suspended and corrective action is not taken within 90
days of the effective date, the Center may issue a notice of termination.
09/16/2016 57
c. Allowable Costs. No costs that are incurred during the suspension period or
after the effective date of termination will be allowable except those that are
specifically authorized by the suspension or termination notice or those that, in
the opinion of the Center, could not have been reasonably avoided.
d. Report and Accounting. Within 30 days of the termination date, the grantee
shall furnish to the Center a summary of progress achieved under the grant, an
itemized accounting of charges incurred against grant funds and cost sharing
prior to the effective date of the suspension or termination, and a separate
accounting and justification for any costs that may have been incurred after this
date.
e. Termination Review Procedures. If the grantee has received a notice of
termination, the grantee may request review of the termination action. The
grantee request for review must be sent via overnight or express delivery [PER
ARRANGEMENTS MADE BY CONTACTING OPEN WORLD DEPUTY
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR JANE SARGUS AT (202) 707-8943] no later than
30 days after the date of the termination notice and should be addressed to the
Chairman of the Board, Open World Leadership Center, Library of Congress,
101 Independence Ave., S.E., Washington, DC 20540-9980, with a copy sent
via overnight or express delivery [PER ARRANGEMENTS MADE BY
CONTACTING THE OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL AT (202)
707-6314] to the Inspector General, Library of Congress, 101 Independence
Ave., S.E., Washington, DC 20540-1060.
A request for review must contain a full statement of the grantee’s position and the
pertinent facts and reasons supporting it. The grantee’s request will be acknowledged
promptly, and a review committee of at least three individuals will be appointed. Pending
the resolution of the review, the notice of termination will remain in effect.
None of the review-committee members will be among those individuals who
recommended termination or were responsible for monitoring the programmatic or
administrative aspects of the awarded grant. The committee will have full access to all
relevant Center background materials. The committee may also request the submission of
additional information from the recipient organization or from Center staff and, at its
discretion, may meet with representatives of both groups to discuss the pertinent issues. All
review activities will be fully documented by the committee. Based on its review, the
committee will present its written recommendation to the Chairman of the Board of the
Center, who will advise the parties concerned of the final decision.
X. Financial Management Standards
Grantee financial management systems must meet the following standards:
a. Accounting System. Grantees must have an accounting system that provides
accurate, current, and complete disclosure of all financial transactions related to
09/16/2016 58
each federally sponsored project. Accounting records must contain information
pertaining to federal awards, authorizations, obligations, unobligated balances,
assets, outlays, and income. These records must be maintained on a current
basis and balanced at least quarterly.
b. Source Documentation. Accounting records must be supported by such source
documentation as canceled checks, bank statements, invoices, paid bills, donor
letters, time and attendance records, activity reports, travel reports, contractual
and consultant agreements, and subaward documentation. All supporting
documentation should be clearly identified with the grant and general ledger
accounts that are to be charged or credited.
(1) The documentation required for salary charges to grants is prescribed by
the cost principles applicable to the grantee organization. If an applicant
organization anticipates salary changes during the course of the grant,
those charges must be included in the budget request.
(2) Formal agreements with independent contractors, such as consultants,
must include a description of the services to be performed, the period of
performance, the fee and method of payment, an itemization of travel
and other costs that are chargeable to the agreement, and the signatures
of both the contractor and an appropriate official of the grantee
organization.
c. Third-Party Contributions. Cash contributions to the project from third parties
must be accounted for in the general ledger with other grant funds. Third-party
in-kind (non-cash) contributions are not required to be recorded in the general
ledger, but must be under accounting control, possibly through the use of a
memorandum ledger. If third-party in-kind (non-cash) contributions are used on
a project, the valuation of these contributions must be supported with adequate
documentation.
d. Internal Control. Grantees must maintain effective control and accountability
for all cash, real and personal property, and other assets. Grantees must
adequately safeguard all such property and must provide assurance that it is used
solely for authorized purposes. Grantees must also have systems in place that
ensure compliance with the terms and conditions of each grant award.
e. Budget Control. Records of expenditures must be maintained for each grant
project by the cost categories of the approved budget (including indirect costs
that are charged to the project), and actual expenditures are to be compared with
budgeted amounts no less frequently than quarterly. Center approval is required
for certain budget revisions.
f. Cash Management. Grantees must also have written procedures to minimize the
time elapsing between the receipt and the disbursement of grant funds to avoid
09/16/2016 59
having excessive federal funds on hand. Requests for advance payment shall be
limited to immediate cash needs and are not to exceed anticipated expenditures
for a 30-day period. Grantees must ensure that all grant funds are obligated
during the grant period and spent no later than 60 days after the end of the grant
period.
XI. Record Retention and Audits
Grantees must retain financial records, supporting documentation, statistical records, and all
other records pertinent to the grant for three years from the date of submission of the final
expenditure report. If the three-year retention period is extended because of audits, appeals,
litigation, or the settlement of claims arising out of the performance of the project, the
records shall be retained until such audits, appeals, litigation, or claims are resolved.
Unless court action or audit proceedings have been initiated, grantees may substitute CD-
ROM or scanned copies of original records.
The Center, the Comptroller General of the United States, the Inspector General of the
Library of Congress (on behalf of the Center), and any of their duly authorized
representatives shall have access to any pertinent books, documents, papers, and records of
a grantee organization to make audits, examinations, excerpts, transcripts, and copies.
Further, any contract in excess of the simplified acquisition threshold (currently $100,000)
that grantees negotiate for the purposes of carrying out the grant project shall include a
provision to the effect that the grantee, the Center, the Comptroller General, the Inspector
General of the Library of Congress, or any of their duly authorized representatives shall
have access for similar purposes to any records of the contractor that are directly pertinent
to the project.
Appendix 1
Procurement Guidelines
I. Procurement Responsibility
The standards contained in this section do not relieve the grantee of the contractual
responsibilities arising under its contracts. The grantee is the responsible authority, without
recourse to the Center regarding the settlement and satisfaction of all contractual and
administrative issues arising out of procurements entered into in support of a grant project.
Matters concerning the violation of a statute are to be referred to such federal, state, or local
authority as may have proper jurisdiction.
The grantee may determine the type of procurement instrument used, e.g., fixed price
contracts, cost reimbursable contracts, incentive contracts, or purchase orders. The contract
type must be appropriate for the particular procurement and for promoting the best interest
09/16/2016 60
of the program involved. The “cost-plus-a-percentage-of-cost” or “percentage of
construction cost” methods shall not be used.
09/16/2016 61
II. Procurement Standards
When grantees procure property or services under a grant, their procurement policies must
adhere to the standards set forth below. Subrecipients of grant funds are subject to the same
policies and procedures as the grantee.
a. Contract Administration. Grantees shall maintain a system for contract
administration that ensures that contractors perform in accordance with the
terms, conditions, and specifications of their contracts or purchase orders.
Grantees shall evaluate contractor performance and document, as appropriate,
whether or not contractors have met the terms, conditions, and specifications of
the contract.
b. Ethical Standards of Conduct. Grantees shall maintain a written standard of
conduct for awarding and administrating contracts. No employee, officer, or
agent of the recipient organization shall participate in the selection, or in the
awarding or administration, of a contract supported by federal funds if a real or
apparent conflict of interest would be involved. Such a conflict would arise
when any of the following have a financial or other interest in the firm selected
for a contract: the employee, officer, or agent; any member of his or her
immediate family; his or her partner; or an organization which employs or is
about to employ any of the preceding.
Grantee officers, employees, and agents will neither solicit nor accept gratuities,
favors, or anything of monetary value from contractors, or parties to
subagreements. However, grantees may set standards governing when the
financial interest is not substantial or the gift is an unsolicited item of nominal
value. The standards of conduct shall provide for disciplinary actions to be
applied for violations of such standards by grantee officers, employees, or
agents.
c. Open and Free Competition. All procurement transactions will be conducted
in a manner to provide, to the maximum extent practical, open and free
competition. Grantees should be alert to organizational conflicts of interest or
noncompetitive practices among contractors that may restrict or eliminate
competition or otherwise restrain trade. In order to ensure objective contractor
performance and eliminate unfair competitive advantage, contractors that
develop or draft specifications, requirements, statements of work, invitations for
bids and/or requests for proposals should be excluded from competing for such
procurements. Awards shall be made to the bidder/offeror whose bid/offer is
responsive to the solicitation and is most advantageous to the grantee, price,
quality, and other factors considered. Solicitations shall clearly set forth all
requirements that the bidder/offeror must fulfill in order for the bid/offer to be
evaluated by the grantee. When it is in the grantee’s interest to do so, any
bid/offer may be rejected.
09/16/2016 62
d. Small, Minority-Owned, and Women’s Business Enterprises. The grantee
shall make positive efforts to assure that small businesses, minority-owned
firms, and women’s business enterprises are used whenever possible.
Organizations receiving federal awards shall take all the steps outlined below to
further this goal. This shall include:
1. Placing qualified small, minority and women’s business enterprises on
solicitation lists;
2. Assuring that these businesses are solicited whenever they are potential
sources;
3. Contracting with consortiums of small, minority-owned, or women’s
business enterprises, when a contract is too large for one of these firms to
handle individually;
4. Using the services and assistance, as appropriate, of such organizations
as the Small Business Administration and the Department of
Commerce’s Minority Business Development Agency; and
5. Considering in the contract process whether firms competing for larger
contracts intend to subcontract with small businesses, minority-owned
firms, and women’s business enterprises.
III. Procurement Procedures
Grantees must have formal procurement procedures. Proposed procurements are to be
reviewed to avoid the purchase of unnecessary or duplicative items.
a. Solicitations. Solicitations for goods and services shall provide the following:
1. A clear and accurate description of the technical requirements for the
material, product, or service to be procured. In competitive
procurements, such a description shall not contain features that unduly
restrict competition.
2. Requirements that the bidder/offeror must fulfill and all other factors to
be used in evaluating bids or proposals.
3. Whenever practicable, a description of technical requirements in terms of
the functions to be performed or the performance required, including the
range of acceptable characteristics or minimum acceptable standards.
4. The specific features of “brand name or equal” descriptions that bidders
are required to meet when such items are included in the solicitation.
09/16/2016 63
5. Preference, to the extent practical and economically feasible, for
products and services that conserve natural resources, protect the
environment, and are energy efficient.
b. Selecting Contractors. Contracts will be made only with responsible
contractors who possess the potential ability to perform successfully under the
terms and conditions of a proposed procurement. Consideration should be given
to such matters as contractor integrity, the record of past performance, financial
and technical resources or accessibility to other necessary resources.
1. Some form of price or cost analysis should be made in connection with
every procurement action. Price analysis may be accomplished in
various ways, including the comparison of price quotations submitted,
market prices and similar indicia, together with discounts. Cost analysis
is the review and evaluation of each element of cost to determine
reasonableness, allocability, and allowability.
2. Procurement records and files for purchases in excess of the simplified
acquisition threshold (currently $100,000) shall include the basis for
contractor selection, justification for lack of competition when
competitive bids or offers are not obtained, and the basis for award cost
or price.
IV. Contract Provisions
a. Contracts in Excess of $100,000. All contracts in excess of $100,000
established under the grant award from the Center must provide for:
1. Administrative, contractual, or legal remedies in instances where
contractors violate or breach contract terms, and such remedial actions as
may be appropriate.
2. Termination for cause and for convenience by the grantee, including the
manner by which it will be effected and the basis for settlement. In
addition, these contracts shall also contain a description of the conditions
under which the contract may be terminated for default as well as
conditions where the contract may be terminated because of
circumstances beyond the control of the contractor.
3. Access by the recipient organization, the Center, the Comptroller
General of the United States, or any other duly authorized
representatives to any books, documents, papers, and records of the
contractor that are directly pertinent to that specific contract for the
purpose of making audit, examination, excerpts, and transcriptions.
09/16/2016 64
b. Standard Clauses. All contracts, including small purchases, shall contain the
following provisions as applicable:
1. Equal Employment Opportunity. All contracts awarded by the grantee
and the grantee’s contractors and subrecipients having a value of more
than $10,000 must contain a provision requiring compliance with
Executive Order 11246, entitled “Equal Employment Opportunity” as
amended by Executive Order 11375, and as supplemented in Department
of Labor regulations (41 CFR, Part 60).
2. Byrd Anti-Lobbying Amendment (31 U.S.C. 1352). Contractors who
apply or bid for an award of $100,000 or more must file a certification
with the grantee stating that they will not and have not used federal
appropriated funds to pay any person or organization for influencing or
attempting to influence an officer or employee of any agency, a member
of Congress, officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a
member of Congress in connection with obtaining any federal contract,
grant, cooperative agreement, loan, or any other award covered by
31 U.S.C. 1352. Such contractors must also disclose to the grantee any
lobbying that takes place in connection with obtaining any federal award.
3. Debarment and Suspension (Executive Orders 12549 and 12689). No
contracts shall be made to parties listed on the General Services
Administration’s Lists of Parties Excluded From Federal Procurement or
Nonprocurement Programs in accordance with Executive Orders 12549
and 12689. These lists contain the names of contractors debarred,
suspended, or proposed for debarment by agencies, and contractors
declared ineligible under other statutory or regulatory authority other
than Executive Order 12549. Grantees must obtain a certification
regarding debarment and suspension from all subrecipients and from all
parties with whom they contract for goods or services when (a) the
amount of the contract is $100,000 or more, or (b) when, regardless of
the amount of the contract, the contractor will have a critical influence or
substantive control over the covered transaction. Such persons would be
project directors and providers of federally required audit services.
V. Other Federal Guidance
a. Buy American Act. Consistent with the Buy American Act, 41 U.S.C.
10a-c and Public Law 105-277, grantees and subrecipients who purchase
products with grant funds should purchase only American-made
equipment and products.
09/16/2016 65
b. Welfare-to-Work Initiative. To supplement the welfare-to-work
initiative, grantees are encouraged, whenever possible, to hire welfare
recipients and to provide additional needed training and/or mentoring.
APPENDIX 2
Cost Principles
I. Introduction
2 CFR Part 230 (OMB Circular A-122), “Cost Principles for Non-Profit
Organizations,” is a comprehensive explanation of which costs are allowable under a
government grant, how to determine whether a cost is reasonable, and how direct and
indirect costs should be allocated. Please refer to the official OMB cost principles
document. Applicant organizations may obtain a paper copy from the Center or read the
full text online by going to www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/cfr-table-search.html#page1.
II. Basic Definitions
Attachment A to the Circular describes
a. Allowable Costs. To be allowable under an award, costs must meet the
following general criteria:
1. Be reasonable for the performance of the award and be allocable thereto
under these principles.
2. Conform to any limitations or exclusions set forth in these principles or
in the award as to types or amount of cost items.
3. Be consistent with policies and procedures that apply uniformly to both
federally financed and other activities of the organization.
4. Be accorded consistent treatment.
5. Be determined in accordance with generally accepted accounting
principles.
6. Not be included as a cost or used to meet cost sharing or matching
requirements of any other federally financed program in either the
current or a prior period.
7. Be adequately documented.
09/16/2016 66
b. Reasonable Costs. A cost is reasonable if, in its nature or amount, it does not
exceed that which would be incurred by a prudent person under the
circumstances prevailing at the time the decision was made to incur the costs. In
determining the reasonableness of a given cost, consideration shall be given to:
1. Whether the cost is of a type generally recognized as ordinary and
necessary for the operation of the organization or the performance of the
award.
2. The restraints or requirements imposed by such factors as generally
accepted sound business practices, arms-length bargaining, federal and
state laws and regulations, and terms and conditions of the award.
3. Whether the individuals concerned acted with prudence in the
circumstances, considering their responsibilities to the organization, its
members, employees, and clients, the public at large, and the federal
government.
4. Significant deviations from the established practices of the organization
that may unjustifiably increase the award costs.
c. Allocable Costs. A cost may be allocated to the recipient organization’s grant
in accordance with the relative benefits received. A cost is allocable to a federal
award if it is treated consistently with other costs incurred for the same purpose
in like circumstances and if it:
Is incurred specifically for the award.
Benefits both the award and other work and can be distributed in
reasonable proportion to the benefits received, or
Is necessary to the overall operation of the organization, although a
direct relationship to any particular cost objective cannot be shown.
Any cost allocable to a particular award or other cost objective under
these principles may not be shifted to other federal awards to
overcome funding deficiencies, or to avoid restrictions imposed by
law or by the terms of the award.
09/16/2016 67
III. Potential Costs
Attachment B to 2 CFR Part 230 (OMB Circular A-122) describes 52 types of costs and
explains when they are allowable and when they are not. Some of the potential costs
covered by the Circular are not relevant to Center projects. Please note that costs marked
with an “X” in the list below are never allowable and must not be included in an applicant
organization’s budget for Center activities or in a grantee’s requests for payment. Other
costs on the list may be unallowable in certain circumstances. Please refer to the Circular
for explanations and contact the Center with any questions.
Failure to mention a particular item of cost is not intended to imply that it is unallowable;
rather, determination as to allowability in each case should be based on the treatment or
principles provided for similar or related items of cost.
1. Advertising and public relations costs
2. Advisory councils
X 3. Alcoholic beverages
4. Audit costs and related services
X 5. Bad debts
6. Bonding costs
7. Communication costs
8. Compensation for personal services
X 9. Contingency provisions
10. Defense and prosecution of criminal and civil proceedings, claims,
appeals and patent infringement
11. Depreciation and use allowances
12. Donations to the grant project
13. Employee morale, health, and welfare costs and credits
14. Entertainment costs
X 15. Equipment and other capital expenditures
X 16. Fines and penalties
X 17. Fund raising and investment management costs
X 18. Gains and losses on depreciable assets
X 19. Goods or services for personal use
X 20. Housing and personal living expenses for organization
employees
21. Idle facilities and idle capacity
22. Insurance and indemnification
X 23. Interest
24. Labor relations costs
X 25. Lobbying
X 26. Losses on other awards
27. Maintenance and repair costs
28. Materials and supplies
29. Meetings and conferences
30. Memberships, subscriptions, and professional activity costs
09/16/2016 68
X 31. Organization costs
32. Page charges in professional journals
33. Participant support costs
34. Patent costs
35. Plant and homeland security costs
36. Pre-agreement costs
37. Professional service costs
38. Publication and printing costs
39. Rearrangement and alteration costs
40. Reconversion costs
41. Recruiting costs
42. Relocation costs
43. Rental costs
44. Royalties and other costs for use of patents and copyrights
45. Selling and marketing
46. Specialized service facilities
47. Taxes
48. Termination costs
49. Training and education costs
50. Transportation costs
51. Travel costs
52. Trustees
09/16/2016 69
APPENDIX 3
Cost-Share Report Form and Instruction Sheet
Below are illustrations of the form and instruction sheet that the Center will provide to
grantees to aid them and local host coordinators (subgrantees) in reporting cost share. The
actual form is a spreadsheet that calculates totals automatically.
Open World Leadership CenterTel 202.707.8943 Fax 202.252.3464
I. Identifying Information:Grantee:
Grant Number:
Program Theme:
Program Dates: Date Form Completed:
II. REQUIRED COST SHARE:
# of Nights
# of
Participants Unit Value Cost Share
X X $100.00 = $0.00
# of Meals
# of
Participants Unit Value Cost Share
X X $10.00 = $0.00
X X $15.00 = $0.00
X X $30.00 = $0.00
SUBTOTAL: $0.00
Miles Price per mile Cost Share
X $0.51 = $0.00
Hours Cost per hour Cost Share
X $8.00 = $0.00
SUBTOTAL: $0.00
Column 1 Column 3 Column 4Column 2
Homestay value:
Number of nights with home hosts:
(www.gsa.gov/perdiem)
Donated meals:
Breakfasts:
Lunches:
Dinners:
(www.gsa.gov/perdiem)
Volunteer/host driving in their own cars:
Total miles all drivers:
(http://www.gsa.gov/)
Volunteer time:
Other unpaid hours (staff, presenter, etc.):
(http://www.dol.gov/esa/minwage/america.htm)
SUBTOTAL REQUIRED COST SHARE: $0.00
III. OPTIONAL SECTIONItems received for free or at a discount, or that you are not claiming reimbursement for:
Item Description Value
SUBTOTAL OPTIONAL COST SHARE: $0.00
Grand Total Cost Share: $0.00
09/16/2016 70
Open World Cost-Share Report Form
Instruction Sheet
The Open World Cost-Share Report Form is designed to be a quick electronic tool for
calculating in-kind contributions. Although the form can be printed and filled out by hand,
the Center recommends using it on-screen, as the Excel file has all of the formulas loaded
into it. If you are a local host coordinator, you may either e-mail or fax the completed form
to your Grantee, along with all other final financial documentation, or you may mail a
printout of it along with hard copies of final financial documentation to your Grantee.
Sending this documentation via e-mail is preferred. All cost-share estimation forms are due
to the Center by March 31, 2018.
Note that the form has three sections. The “Identifying Information” and “Required Cost
Share” sections must be filled out in their entirety. The default amounts provided in
Columns 2 and 3 are only estimates—please use the web links provided to find the amounts
that apply to your state. There is no need to provide official documentation supporting the
dollar amounts entered. The “Optional Section” is provided for you to list any other
relevant in-kind contributions you choose. If you have any questions about these
instructions, please contact Deputy Executive Director Jane Sargus at 202-707-8943 or
jsar@openworld.gov (please put GRANT NUMBER OWLC-17XX - COST SHARE in the
subject line).
INSTRUCTIONS
IDENTIFYING INFORMATION:
1. List your organization’s name. If a subgrantee is completing the form, please list
first the primary grantee organization followed by the subgrantee organization.
2. Fill in the Open World Grant Number (e.g., OWLC—1776).
3. List the theme and dates of your program.
4. Note the form’s completion date.
REQUIRED COST SHARE:
Homestay value:
1. Complete Column 1 with the number of nights of homestay provided to participants
(delegates plus facilitator[s]).
2. Complete Column 2 with the number of participants to whom homestays were
provided.
3. Column 3: Use the provided web link to check whether you may claim a higher unit
value than the default value in Column 3 (based on your state). If you can, plug the
higher value into the box titled “Unit Value.”
4. Column 4 will automatically populate.
09/16/2016 71
Donated meals:
1. Complete Column 1 with the number of meals donated to the participants. (NOTE:
This may include meals provided by homestay hosts, banquets, group breakfasts,
etc.)
2. Complete Column 2 with the number of participants for each different type of
donated meal (delegates plus facilitator[s]).
3. Column 3: Use the provided web link to check whether you may claim a higher unit
value than the default value in Column 3 (based on your state). If you can, plug the
higher value into the box titled “Unit Value.”
4. Column 4 will automatically populate, as will the “Subtotal” amount.
Volunteer/hosts driving in their own cars:
1. Complete Column 1 with the total number of miles donated in the process of
transporting participants.
2. Column 2: Use the provided web link to check whether you may claim a higher unit
value than the default value in Column 2 (based on your state). If you can, plug the
higher value into the box titled “Price per mile.”
3. Column 4 will automatically populate.
Volunteer time:
1. Complete Column 1 with the number of volunteer hours donated in the appropriate
category.
2. Column 2: Use the provided web link to check whether you may claim a higher unit
value than the default value in Column 2 (based on your state). If you can, plug the
higher value into the box titled “Cost per hour.”
3. Column 4 will automatically populate.
“Subtotal Required Cost Share” will automatically populate.
OPTIONAL SECTION:
Examples of items that might be noted in this section include donated gifts for
delegates, discounts or free tickets for entertainment, donated overhead or
administrative fees, and receptions.
1. Provide a brief but complete description of each in-kind contribution.
2. Enter the appropriate value amount for each contribution.
3. The “Subtotal Optional Cost Share” amount and the “Grand Total Cost Share”
amount will automatically populate.
09/16/2016 72
APPENDIX 4
Glossary of Terms
Cash Contributions - The cash outlay for budgeted project activities, including the outlay of
money contributed to the grantee by third parties.
Cost Sharing - The portion of the costs of a project not charged to the Center funds. This
would include cash contributions (as defined above) as well as the value of third-party in-
kind contributions.
Debarment - The ineligibility of a grantee to receive any assistance or benefits from the
federal government, either indefinitely or for a specified period of time, based on legal
proceedings taken pursuant to agency regulations implementing Executive Order 12549.
Equipment - Tangible, non-expendable personal property having a useful life of more than
one year and an acquisition cost of $5,000 or more per unit.
Federally Recognized Tribal Government - The governing body or a governmental agency
of any Indian tribe, Indian band, nation, or other organized group or community certified by
the Secretary of the Interior as eligible for the special programs and services provided
through the Bureau of Indian Affairs.
Grant - A legal instrument that provides financial assistance in the form of money or
property to an eligible recipient. The term includes cooperative agreements but it does not
apply to technical assistance which provides services instead of money, or other assistance
in the form of revenue sharing, loans, loan guarantees, interest subsidies, insurance, or
direct appropriations. The term does not include fellowships or other lump sum awards for
which the recipient is not required to provide a financial accounting.
Grant Administrator - The member of the grantee organization who has the official
responsibility for administering the grant, e.g., for negotiating budget revisions, overseeing
the submission of required reports, and ensuring compliance with the terms and conditions
of the grant.
Grant Period - The period established in the grant award during which the Center activities
and expenditures are to occur.
Grantee - The organization to which a grant is awarded and which is accountable for the use
of the funds provided.
Grants Officer - The Center staff member so designated by the Executive Director.
In-Kind Contributions - The value of noncash contributions provided by third parties. In-
kind contributions may be in the form of charges for real property and equipment or the
value of goods and services directly benefitting and specifically identifiable to the project.
09/16/2016 73
Intangible Property - Includes, but is not limited to, trademarks; copyrights; patents and
patent applications.
Local Government - A county, municipality, city, town, township, local public authority,
school district, special district, intrastate district, council of government, any other regional
or interstate government entity, or any agency or instrumentality of a local government.
Obligation - The amounts of orders placed, contracts and grants awarded, goods and
services received, and similar transactions during the grant period that will require payment.
Program Income - Money that is earned or received by a grantee or a subrecipient from the
activities supported by grant funds or from products resulting from grant activities. It
includes, but is not limited to, income from fees for services performed and from the sale of
items fabricated under a grant; admission fees; broadcast or distribution rights; and royalties
on patents and copyrights.
Project Funds - Both the federal and nonfederal funds that are used to cover the cost of
budgeted project activities.
Simplified Acquisition Threshold - This term replaces “small purchase threshold,” and the
threshold is currently set at $100,000 [41 U.S.C. 403 (11)].
State - Any of the several states of the United States, the District of Columbia, the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, any territory or possession of the United States, or any
agency or instrumentality of a state exclusive of local governments, institutions of higher
education, and hospitals.
Subgrant - An award of financial assistance in the form of money or property, made under a
grant by a grantee to an eligible subrecipient or by a subrecipient to a lower-tier
subrecipient. The term includes financial assistance which is provided by any legal
agreement, even if the agreement is called a contract, but it does not include the
procurement of goods and services nor does it include any form of assistance that is
excluded from the definition of a “grant.”
Subrecipient (Subgrantee) - The legal entity to which a subgrant is awarded and which is
accountable to the grantee for the use of the funds provided.
Supplies - All personal property excluding equipment and intangible property, as defined in
this glossary.
09/16/2016 74
Suspension -
(1) The suspension of a grant is the temporary withdrawal of Center
sponsorship. This includes the withdrawal of authority to incur expenditures against grant
funds, pending corrective action, or a decision to terminate the grant.
(2) The suspension of an individual or organization that causes that party to be
temporarily ineligible to receive any assistance and benefits from the federal government
pending the completion of investigation and legal proceedings as prescribed under agency
regulations implementing Executive Order 12549. Such actions may lead to debarment of
the grantee.
Termination - Cancellation of Center sponsorship of a project, including the withdrawal of
authority to incur expenditures against previously awarded grant funds before that authority
would otherwise expire.
top related